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 *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31881172)

  • 21. A CBCT Evaluation of Esthetic Preference Regarding the Perceived Facial Attractiveness of Young Korean Female Adults with a Normal Skeletal Pattern.
    Oh JH; Park JH; Cho HJ; Seo HY; Chae JM
    Sensors (Basel); 2022 Sep; 22(19):. PubMed ID: 36236357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. How does variation in lower anterior face height influence perceived attractiveness? A quantitative investigation.
    Naini FB; Donaldson AN; McDonald F; Cobourne MT
    J Orthod; 2013 Sep; 40(3):206-17. PubMed ID: 24009320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Perceptions of dental professionals and laypersons to altered dental esthetics: asymmetric and symmetric situations.
    Kokich VO; Kokich VG; Kiyak HA
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Aug; 130(2):141-51. PubMed ID: 16905057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Effects of laterality on esthetic preferences of orthodontists, maxillofacial surgeons, and laypeople regarding the lip position and facial convexity: a psychometric clinical trial.
    Mousavi SM; Saeidi Ghorani P; Deilamani A; Rakhshan V
    Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2019 Dec; 23(4):439-451. PubMed ID: 31446526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Assessing the influence of lower facial profile convexity on perceived attractiveness in the orthognathic patient, clinician, and layperson.
    Naini FB; Donaldson AN; McDonald F; Cobourne MT
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2012 Sep; 114(3):303-11. PubMed ID: 22883980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Assessing the Influence of Chin Asymmetry on Perceived Facial Esthetics With 3-Dimensional Images.
    Dong T; Ye N; Yuan L; Wu S; Xia L; Fang B
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2020 Aug; 78(8):1389-1396. PubMed ID: 32304663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Analysing chin prominence in relation to the lower lip: The lower lip-chin prominence angle.
    Naini FB; Garagiola U; Wertheim D
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2019 Aug; 47(8):1310-1316. PubMed ID: 31331858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Submental fat transfer: an approach to enhance soft tissue conditions in patients with submental lipomatosis after orthognathic surgery.
    Bohluli B; Varedi P; Bayat M; Bagheri SC
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2014 Jan; 72(1):164.e1-7. PubMed ID: 24331567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Effects of different nose types on class II treatments for female patients.
    Cankaya OS; Celebi F; Bicakci AA
    Prog Orthod; 2019 Dec; 20(1):44. PubMed ID: 31788737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The influence of bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy on submental-cervical aesthetics.
    Soydan SS; Uckan S; Ustdal A; Bayram B; Bayrak B
    J Oral Rehabil; 2014 Nov; 41(11):816-21. PubMed ID: 24946129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The effect of treatment on facial attractiveness.
    Phillips C; Trentini CJ; Douvartzidis N
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 1992 Jun; 50(6):590-4. PubMed ID: 1593319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Assessing the influence of chin prominence on profile esthetics: A survey study.
    Pişiren AB; Arman-Özçırpıcı A; Tunçer Nİ
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2018 Apr; 46(4):628-634. PubMed ID: 29506888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Effect of orthognathic surgery on profile esthetics in Class II:1 malocclusions.
    Klaus K; Heumann C; Ruf S
    J Orofac Orthop; 2017 Nov; 78(6):472-479. PubMed ID: 28660422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Perceptions of chin asymmetries among dental professionals and laypersons.
    Jarosz KF; Bosio JA; Bloomstein R; Jiang SS; Vakharia NS; Cangialosi TJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2018 Aug; 154(2):201-212. PubMed ID: 30075922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparing the perception of dentists and lay people to altered dental esthetics.
    Kokich VO; Kiyak HA; Shapiro PA
    J Esthet Dent; 1999; 11(6):311-24. PubMed ID: 10825866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Role of sagittal and oblique smiling profiles in evaluating facial esthetics.
    Yang X; Yi Y; Yang S; Xue C; Wang Y; Chen M; Han X; Bai D
    J Craniofac Surg; 2015 Mar; 26(2):532-6. PubMed ID: 25668109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Profile changes in orthodontic patients treated with mandibular advancement surgery.
    Tsang ST; McFadden LR; Wiltshire WA; Pershad N; Baker AB
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jan; 135(1):66-72. PubMed ID: 19121503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Contribution of malocclusion and female facial attractiveness to smile esthetics evaluated by eye tracking.
    Richards MR; Fields HW; Beck FM; Firestone AR; Walther DB; Rosenstiel S; Sacksteder JM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2015 Apr; 147(4):472-82. PubMed ID: 25836007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Enhanced Submentoplasty as an Adjunct to Orthognathic Surgery for the Improvement of the Neck-Throat Point.
    Serra MM; Storrs BP; Czerepak J; Arnold PJ; Griffin JE; Berry-Cabán CS
    Med J (Ft Sam Houst Tex); 2021; (PB 8-21-10/11/12):55-59. PubMed ID: 34714923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Patient- and clinician-perceived need for orthognathic surgery.
    Juggins KJ; Nixon F; Cunningham SJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Dec; 128(6):697-702. PubMed ID: 16360908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.