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 *

144 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30920871)

  • 1. Precision of the virtual occlusal record.
    Botsford KP; Frazier MC; Ghoneima AAM; Utreja A; Bhamidipalli SS; Stewart KT
    Angle Orthod; 2019 Sep; 89(5):751-757. PubMed ID: 30920871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy and precision of occlusal contacts of stereolithographic casts mounted by digital interocclusal registrations.
    Krahenbuhl JT; Cho SH; Irelan J; Bansal NK
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Aug; 116(2):231-6. PubMed ID: 27068319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The accuracy of virtual interocclusal registration during intraoral scanning.
    Edher F; Hannam AG; Tobias DL; Wyatt CCL
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Dec; 120(6):904-912. PubMed ID: 29961618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Reliability and Validity of T-scan and 3D Intraoral Scanning for Measuring the Occlusal Contact Area.
    Ayuso-Montero R; Mariano-Hernandez Y; Khoury-Ribas L; Rovira-Lastra B; Willaert E; Martinez-Gomis J
    J Prosthodont; 2020 Jan; 29(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 31270888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Virtual bite registration using intraoral digital scanning, CT and CBCT: In vitro evaluation of a new method and its implication for orthognathic surgery.
    Nilsson J; Richards RG; Thor A; Kamer L
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2016 Sep; 44(9):1194-200. PubMed ID: 27423538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Construction of virtual intercuspal occlusion: Considering tooth displacement.
    Li L; Chen H; Wang Y; Sun Y
    J Oral Rehabil; 2021 Jun; 48(6):701-710. PubMed ID: 33486815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Accuracy of optical interocclusal registration using an intraoral scanner.
    Okamoto M; Tanabe N; Fukazawa S; Oyamada Y; Kondo H
    J Prosthodont Res; 2023 Oct; 67(4):619-625. PubMed ID: 36967125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Influence of clenching intensity on bite force balance, occlusal contact area, and average bite pressure.
    Hidaka O; Iwasaki M; Saito M; Morimoto T
    J Dent Res; 1999 Jul; 78(7):1336-44. PubMed ID: 10403461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Relative contributions of occlusion, maximum bite force, and chewing cycle kinematics to masticatory performance.
    Lepley CR; Throckmorton GS; Ceen RF; Buschang PH
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 May; 139(5):606-13. PubMed ID: 21536203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A Technique for Digital Impression and Bite Registration for a Single Edentulous Arch.
    Fang Y; Fang JH; Jeong SM; Choi BH
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e519-e523. PubMed ID: 29522269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of the occlusal contact area of virtual models and actual models: a comparative in vitro study on Class I and Class II malocclusion models.
    Lee H; Cha J; Chun YS; Kim M
    BMC Oral Health; 2018 Jun; 18(1):109. PubMed ID: 29921259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Simulation of dental collisions and occlusal dynamics in the virtual environment.
    Stavness IK; Hannam AG; Tobias DL; Zhang X
    J Oral Rehabil; 2016 Apr; 43(4):269-78. PubMed ID: 26685912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparing maximum intercuspal contacts of virtual dental patients and mounted dental casts.
    Delong R; Ko CC; Anderson GC; Hodges JS; Douglas WH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Dec; 88(6):622-30. PubMed ID: 12488856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A new technique for testing accuracy and sensitivity of digital bite registration: A prospective comparative study.
    Camcı H; Salmanpour F
    Int Orthod; 2021 Sep; 19(3):425-432. PubMed ID: 34274289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Clinical investigations of the comparability of different methods used to display occlusal contact points.
    Heuser F; Bourauel C; Stark H; Dörsam I
    Int J Comput Dent; 2020; 23(3):245-255. PubMed ID: 32789312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Influence of intraoral scan and dental cast scan on occlusal quantitative analysis of virtual dental model].
    Cheng MX; Jiang T; Sun YC; Zhang HY
    Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2018 Feb; 50(1):136-140. PubMed ID: 29483736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Two-year follow-up of changes in bite force and occlusal contact area after intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy with and without Le Fort I osteotomy.
    Choi YJ; Lim H; Chung CJ; Park KH; Kim KH
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2014 Jun; 43(6):742-7. PubMed ID: 24630069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of a conventional and virtual occlusal record.
    Solaberrieta E; Otegi JR; Goicoechea N; Brizuela A; Pradies G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Jul; 114(1):92-7. PubMed ID: 25858220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Complete assessment of occlusal dynamics and establishment of a digital workflow by using target tracking with a three-dimensional facial scanner.
    Kim JE; Park JH; Moon HS; Shim JS
    J Prosthodont Res; 2019 Jan; 63(1):120-124. PubMed ID: 30446410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Accuracy of contacts calculated from 3D images of occlusal surfaces.
    DeLong R; Knorr S; Anderson GC; Hodges J; Pintado MR
    J Dent; 2007 Jun; 35(6):528-34. PubMed ID: 17418474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.