These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30112490)

  • 1. Patients' and Parents' Perception of Functional Appliances: A Survey Study.
    Lena Y; Bozkurt AP; Yetkiner E
    Turk J Orthod; 2017 Jun; 30(2):33-41. PubMed ID: 30112490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. FIXED OR REMOVABLE APPLIANCE FOR EARLY ORTHODONTIC TREATMENT OF FUNCTIONAL ANTERIOR CROSSBITE.
    Wiedel AP
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 2015; (238):10-72. PubMed ID: 26939312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children.
    Thiruvenkatachari B; Harrison JE; Worthington HV; O'Brien KD
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2013 Nov; (11):CD003452. PubMed ID: 24226169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A randomized controlled trial of self-perceived pain, discomfort, and impairment of jaw function in children undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances.
    Wiedel AP; Bondemark L
    Angle Orthod; 2016 Mar; 86(2):324-30. PubMed ID: 26185899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Reflection on patients' experience with orthodontic appliances wear and its impact on oral health related quality of life: observational comparative study.
    Abutaleb MA; Latief MHAE; Montasser MA
    BMC Oral Health; 2023 Jul; 23(1):502. PubMed ID: 37468940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Oral Impacts Experienced by Orthodontic Patients Undergoing Fixed or Removable Appliances Therapy in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
    Baseer MA; Almayah NA; Alqahtani KM; Alshaye MI; Aldhahri MM
    Patient Prefer Adherence; 2021; 15():2683-2691. PubMed ID: 34880603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Treatment effects produced by the Twin-block appliance vs the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in growing Class II patients.
    Giuntini V; Vangelisti A; Masucci C; Defraia E; McNamara JA; Franchi L
    Angle Orthod; 2015 Sep; 85(5):784-9. PubMed ID: 25786056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Treatment of division II malocclusion in young adult with Forsus fatigue-resistant device.
    Krishna Nayak US; Goyal V
    Indian J Dent Res; 2012; 23(2):289-91. PubMed ID: 22945727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents.
    Batista KB; Thiruvenkatachari B; Harrison JE; O'Brien KD
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2018 Mar; 3(3):CD003452. PubMed ID: 29534303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Changes of epiglottis and hyoid bone position after orthodontic treatment with cast splint fixed functional appliances.
    Hourfar J; Lisson JA; Kinzinger GSM
    Clin Oral Investig; 2021 Mar; 25(3):1525-1534. PubMed ID: 33409688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. One phase or two phases orthodontic treatment for Class II division 1 malocclusion?
    Veitz-Keenan A; Liu N
    Evid Based Dent; 2019 Jun; 20(2):56-57. PubMed ID: 31253968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of external apical root resorption caused by fixed functional treatment of class II malocclusion : Cast splint Herbst appliance vs. Forsus fatigue resistant device.
    Çoban G; Gül Amuk N; Yağcı A; Akgün G; Abbood Abbood IH
    J Orofac Orthop; 2023 Jan; 84(1):50-59. PubMed ID: 34331069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Orthodontists' preference on type of rigid fixed functional appliance for skeletal Class II correction: A survey study.
    Borghei S; Broadbent J; Stevens R; Chaudhry K; Subramani K
    J Clin Exp Dent; 2020 Oct; 12(10):e958-e963. PubMed ID: 33154798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. One phase or two phase orthodontic treatment for Class II division 1 malocclusion ?
    Veitz-Keenan A; Liu N
    Evid Based Dent; 2019 Sep; 20(3):72-73. PubMed ID: 31562403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparision of Twin-block and Forsus (FRD) functional appliance--a cephalometric study.
    Mahamad IK; Neela PK; Mascarenhas R; Husain A
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2012; 23(3):49-58. PubMed ID: 23094559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of the effects of fixed and removable functional appliances on the skeletal and dentoalveolar structures.
    Bilgiç F; Hamamci O; Başaran G
    Aust Orthod J; 2011 Nov; 27(2):110-6. PubMed ID: 22372266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Treatment of class II malocclussion: A comparative study of the effects of twin-block and fatigue resistant device.
    Gulec A; Goymen M
    Niger J Clin Pract; 2018 Dec; 21(12):1557-1563. PubMed ID: 30560817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of 2 treatment protocols using fixed functional appliances in Class II malocclusion: Treatment results and stability.
    Bozkurt AP; Aras I; Othman E; Aras A
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2020 Apr; 157(4):474-480. PubMed ID: 32241354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Treatment effects of skeletally anchored Forsus FRD EZ and Herbst appliances: A retrospective clinical study.
    Celikoglu M; Buyuk SK; Ekizer A; Unal T
    Angle Orthod; 2016 Mar; 86(2):306-14. PubMed ID: 26258899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A retrospective cephalometric investigation of two fixed functional orthodontic appliances in class II treatment: Functional Mandibular Advancer vs. Herbst appliance.
    Kinzinger GSM; Lisson JA; Frye L; Gross U; Hourfar J
    Clin Oral Investig; 2018 Jan; 22(1):293-304. PubMed ID: 28365810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.