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 *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31915610)

  • 1. Three-dimensional comparison of 2 digital models obtained from cone-beam computed tomographic scans of polyvinyl siloxane impressions and plaster models.
    Park JY; Kim D; Han SS; Yu HS; Cha JY
    Imaging Sci Dent; 2019 Dec; 49(4):257-263. PubMed ID: 31915610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of Bolton analysis measured in laser scanned digital models compared with plaster models (gold standard) and cone-beam computer tomography images.
    Kim J; Lagravére MO
    Korean J Orthod; 2016 Jan; 46(1):13-9. PubMed ID: 26877978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessment of the accuracy of laser-scanned models and 3-dimensional rendered cone-beam computed tomographic images compared to digital caliper measurements on plaster casts.
    Yousefi F; Shokri A; Zahedi F; Farhadian M
    Imaging Sci Dent; 2021 Dec; 51(4):429-438. PubMed ID: 34988004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of linear measurements on digital models obtained from intraoral and cone-beam computed tomography scans of alginate impressions.
    Wiranto MG; Engelbrecht WP; Tutein Nolthenius HE; van der Meer WJ; Ren Y
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Jan; 143(1):140-7. PubMed ID: 23273370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Exploring a new method for superimposition of pre-treatment and post-treatment mandibular digital dental casts in adults].
    Dai FF; Liu Y; Xu TM; Chen G
    Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2018 Apr; 50(2):271-278. PubMed ID: 29643526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of dental measurements between conventional plaster models, digital models obtained by impression scanning and plaster model scanning.
    Gül Amuk N; Karsli E; Kurt G
    Int Orthod; 2019 Mar; 17(1):151-158. PubMed ID: 30772351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Accuracy and reliability of a novel method for fusion of digital dental casts and Cone Beam Computed Tomography scans.
    Rangel FA; Maal TJ; Bronkhorst EM; Breuning KH; Schols JG; Bergé SJ; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM
    PLoS One; 2013; 8(3):e59130. PubMed ID: 23527111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Analysis of intra-arch and interarch measurements from digital models with 2 impression materials and a modeling process based on cone-beam computed tomography.
    White AJ; Fallis DW; Vandewalle KS
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Apr; 137(4):456.e1-9; discussion 456-7. PubMed ID: 20362900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Digital model as an alternative to plaster model in assessment of space analysis.
    Kumar AA; Phillip A; Kumar S; Rawat A; Priya S; Kumaran V
    J Pharm Bioallied Sci; 2015 Aug; 7(Suppl 2):S465-9. PubMed ID: 26538899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Accuracy of IOS in Full-Arch Dentate Patients Compared to CBCT Cast-Scanning. An In-Vivo Study.
    Michelinakis G; Apostolakis D; Pavlakis E; Kourakis G; Papavasiliou G
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2019 Aug; 27(3):122-130. PubMed ID: 31433136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of laser-scanned models compared to plaster models and cone-beam computed tomography.
    Kim J; Heo G; Lagravère MO
    Angle Orthod; 2014 May; 84(3):443-50. PubMed ID: 23957664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Accuracy of three-dimensional printed models derived from cone-beam computed tomography.
    Ferraro JM; Falter J; Lee S; Watanabe K; Wu TH; Kim DG; Ko CC; Tanaka E; Deguchi T
    Angle Orthod; 2022 Nov; 92(6):722-727. PubMed ID: 35852459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Accuracy and reproducibility of permanent dentitions and dental arch measurements: comparing three different digital models with a plaster study cast.
    Al-Mashraqi AA; Alhammadi MS; Gadi AA; Altharawi RA; Zamim KAH; Halboub E
    Int J Comput Dent; 2021 Dec; 24(4):353-362. PubMed ID: 34931771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effectiveness of creating digital twins with different digital dentition models and cone-beam computed tomography.
    Lee JH; Lee HL; Park IY; On SW; Byun SH; Yang BE
    Sci Rep; 2023 Jun; 13(1):10603. PubMed ID: 37391453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dimensional accuracy of microcomputed tomography-scanned half-arch impressions.
    Kerr M; Park N; Leeson D; Nikolskiy S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 May; 121(5):797-802. PubMed ID: 30617030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation of accuracy and repeatability using CBCT and a dental scanner by means of 3D software.
    Kim SR; Kim CM; Jeong ID; Kim WC; Kim HY; Kim JH
    Int J Comput Dent; 2017; 20(1):65-73. PubMed ID: 28294206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Dental measurements and Bolton index reliability and accuracy obtained from 2D digital, 3D segmented CBCT, and 3d intraoral laser scanner.
    San José V; Bellot-Arcís C; Tarazona B; Zamora N; O Lagravère M; Paredes-Gallardo V
    J Clin Exp Dent; 2017 Dec; 9(12):e1466-e1473. PubMed ID: 29410764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of digital dental models obtained from dental cone-beam computed tomography scan of alginate impressions.
    Jiang T; Lee SM; Hou Y; Chang X; Hwang HS
    Korean J Orthod; 2016 May; 46(3):129-36. PubMed ID: 27226958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Positional accuracy of a prosthetic treatment plan incorporated into a cone beam computed tomography scan using surface scan registration.
    Jamjoom FZ; Kim DG; McGlumphy EA; Lee DJ; Yilmaz B
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Sep; 120(3):367-374. PubMed ID: 29703673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Influence of abutment tooth geometry on the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining dental impressions.
    Carbajal Mejía JB; Wakabayashi K; Nakamura T; Yatani H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Sep; 118(3):392-399. PubMed ID: 28222873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.