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 *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30216130)

  • 41. Amalgam or composite resin? Factors influencing the choice of restorative material.
    Correa MB; Peres MA; Peres KG; Horta BL; Barros AD; Demarco FF
    J Dent; 2012 Sep; 40(9):703-10. PubMed ID: 22546263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Trends in dental education in the Persian Gulf--an example from Iran: contemporary placement of posterior composites.
    Sadeghi M; Lynch CD; Wilson NH
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2009 Dec; 17(4):182-7. PubMed ID: 20158061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Dentists' restorative decision-making and implications for an 'amalgamless' profession. Part 1: a review.
    Alexander G; Hopcraft MS; Tyas MJ; Wong RH
    Aust Dent J; 2014 Dec; 59(4):408-19. PubMed ID: 25090909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Survey on the teaching and use in dental schools of resin-based materials for restoring posterior teeth.
    Liew Z; Nguyen E; Stella R; Thong I; Yip N; Zhang F; Burrow MF; Tyas MJ
    Int Dent J; 2011 Feb; 61(1):12-8. PubMed ID: 21382028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Selection of restorative materials in general dental practice in Sweden.
    Mjör IA
    Acta Odontol Scand; 1997 Jan; 55(1):53-7. PubMed ID: 9083577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Use of lining materials under posterior resin composite restorations in the UK.
    Blum IR; Younis N; Wilson NH
    J Dent; 2017 Feb; 57():66-72. PubMed ID: 27988345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Association between caries location and restorative material treatment provided.
    Lubisich EB; Hilton TJ; Ferracane JL; Pashova HI; Burton B;
    J Dent; 2011 Apr; 39(4):302-8. PubMed ID: 21256915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Frequency of restoration replacement in posterior teeth for U.S. Navy and Marine Corps personnel.
    Laccabue M; Ahlf RL; Simecek JW
    Oper Dent; 2014; 39(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 23802636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. The teaching of Class I and II restorations in primary molars: a survey of North American dental schools.
    Guelmann M; Mjör IA; Jerrell GR
    Pediatr Dent; 2001; 23(5):410-4. PubMed ID: 11699164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Repair of defective composite restorations. A questionnaire study among dentists in the Public Dental Service in Norway.
    Staxrud F; Tveit AB; Rukke HV; Kopperud SE
    J Dent; 2016 Sep; 52():50-4. PubMed ID: 27421988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Why, when, and how general practitioners restore endodontically treated teeth: a representative survey in Germany.
    Naumann M; Neuhaus KW; Kölpin M; Seemann R
    Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Mar; 20(2):253-9. PubMed ID: 26082310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Teeth with large amalgam restorations and crowns: factors affecting the receipt of subsequent treatment after 10 years.
    Kolker JL; Damiano PC; Caplan DJ; Armstrong SR; Dawson DV; Jones MP; Flach SD; Warren JJ; Kuthy RA
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2005 Jun; 136(6):738-48; quiz 805-6. PubMed ID: 16022038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. The teaching of posterior composites: A survey of dental schools in Oceania.
    Loch C; Liaw Y; Metussin AP; Lynch CD; Wilson N; Blum IR; Brunton PA
    J Dent; 2019 May; 84():36-43. PubMed ID: 30690112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Amalgam and composite use in UK general dental practice in 2001.
    Burke FJ; McHugh S; Hall AC; Randall RC; Widstrom E; Forss H
    Br Dent J; 2003 Jun; 194(11):613-8; discussion 609. PubMed ID: 12819697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. The prevalence of postoperative sensitivity in teeth restored with Class II composite resin restorations.
    Borgmeijer PJ; Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Akerboom HB; Gruythuysen RJ
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1991; 58(5):378-83. PubMed ID: 1939803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Clinical performance of posterior composite resin restorations.
    Johnson GH; Bales DJ; Gordon GE; Powell LV
    Quintessence Int; 1992 Oct; 23(10):705-11. PubMed ID: 1289954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Dentists' restorative decision-making and implications for an 'amalgamless' profession. Part 5: knowledge factors.
    Alexander G; Hopcraft MS; Tyas MJ; Wong R
    Aust Dent J; 2017 Dec; 62(4):440-452. PubMed ID: 28542834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Attitudes of some European dental undergraduate students to the placement of direct restorative materials in posterior teeth.
    Lynch CD; Guillem SE; Nagrani B; Gilmour AS; Ericson D
    J Oral Rehabil; 2010 Dec; 37(12):916-26. PubMed ID: 20557432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Preventive resin restorations vs. amalgam restorations: a three-year clinical study.
    Cloyd S; Gilpatrick RO; Moore D
    J Tenn Dent Assoc; 1997 Oct; 77(4):36-40. PubMed ID: 9520761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Teaching posterior composite resin restorations in the United Kingdom and Ireland: consensus views of teachers.
    Lynch CD; Shortall AC; Stewardson D; Tomson PL; Burke FJ
    Br Dent J; 2007 Aug; 203(4):183-7. PubMed ID: 17721472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.