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: 34234201)

  • 1. Effect of Class II functional treatment on facial attractiveness, as perceived by professionals and laypeople.
    Santori F; Masedu F; Ciavarella D; Staderini E; Chimenti C; Tepedino M
    Sci Rep; 2021 Jul; 11(1):13989. PubMed ID: 34234201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Facial attractiveness of skeletal class I and class II malocclusion as perceived by laypeople, patients and clinicians.
    Pace M; Cioffi I; D'antò V; Valletta A; Valletta R; Amato M
    Minerva Stomatol; 2018 Jun; 67(3):77-85. PubMed ID: 29308854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Facial-profile attractiveness changes in adult patients treated with the Herbst appliance.
    von Bremen J; Erbe C; Pancherz H; Ruf S
    J Orofac Orthop; 2014 May; 75(3):167-74. PubMed ID: 24825829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Impact of functional orthodontic treatment on facial attractiveness of children with Class II division 1 malocclusion.
    Paduano S; Rongo R; Bucci R; Carvelli G; Cioffi I
    Eur J Orthod; 2020 Apr; 42(2):144-150. PubMed ID: 31586412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Esthetic perceptions of facial silhouettes after treatment with a mandibular protraction appliance.
    Molina de Paula EC; de Castro Ferreira Conti AC; Siqueira DF; Valarelli DP; de Almeida-Pedrin RR
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Feb; 151(2):311-316. PubMed ID: 28153160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Early treatment for Class II malocclusion and perceived improvements in facial profile.
    O'Brien K; Macfarlane T; Wright J; Conboy F; Appelbe P; Birnie D; Chadwick S; Connolly I; Hammond M; Harradine N; Lewis D; Littlewood S; McDade C; Mitchell L; Murray A; O'Neill J; Sandler J; Read M; Robinson S; Shaw I; Turbill E
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 May; 135(5):580-5. PubMed ID: 19409340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Attractiveness of the facial profile: comparison of Class II patients treated with Twin Force® or intermaxillary elastics.
    Pozza OA; Cançado RH; Valarelli FP; Freitas KMS; Oliveira RC; Oliveira RCG
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2021; 26(5):e212014. PubMed ID: 34669827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The importance of using the entire face to assess facial profile attractiveness.
    Tauk A; Bassil-Nassif N; Mouhanna-Fattal C; Bouserhal J
    Int Orthod; 2016 Mar; 14(1):65-79. PubMed ID: 26867684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Attractiveness of facial profiles as rated by individuals with different levels of education.
    Hönn M; Dietz K; Eiselt ML; Göz G
    J Orofac Orthop; 2008 Jan; 69(1):20-30. PubMed ID: 18213458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Three-dimensional aesthetic assessment of class II patients before and after orthognathic surgery and its association with quantitative surgical changes.
    Storms AS; Vansant L; Shaheen E; Coucke W; de Llano-Pérula MC; Jacobs R; Politis C; Willems G
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2017 Dec; 46(12):1664-1671. PubMed ID: 28751183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Long-term profile attractiveness of patients with Class I and II malocclusion treated with and without extractions: A 35-year follow-up.
    Bravo Vallejo G; Alcaraz Ros GD; Peloso RM; Gambardela-Tkacz CM; Cotrin P; Freitas KMS; de Freitas MR
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2024 May; 165(5):513-519. PubMed ID: 38231168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A comparison of providers' and consumers' perceptions of facial-profile attractiveness.
    Maple JR; Vig KW; Beck FM; Larsen PE; Shanker S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Dec; 128(6):690-6; quiz 801. PubMed ID: 16360907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Perceived relative attractiveness of facial profiles with varying degrees of skeletal anomalies.
    Hönn M; Dietz K; Godt A; Göz G
    J Orofac Orthop; 2005 May; 66(3):187-96. PubMed ID: 15959632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Perception of changes in soft-tissue profile after Herbst appliance treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion.
    Rego MV; Martinez EF; Coelho RM; Leal LM; Thiesen G
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Mar; 151(3):559-564. PubMed ID: 28257740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of the influence of dental and facial aesthetics in determining overall attractiveness.
    Prasad KN; Sabrish S; Mathew S; Shivamurthy PG; Pattabiraman V; Sagarkar R
    Int Orthod; 2018 Dec; 16(4):684-697. PubMed ID: 30385289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Perception of facial profile attractiveness of different antero-posterior and vertical proportions.
    Abu Arqoub SH; Al-Khateeb SN
    Eur J Orthod; 2011 Feb; 33(1):103-11. PubMed ID: 20558590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The impact of education on the perception of facial profile aesthetics and treatment need.
    Falkensammer F; Loesch A; Krall C; Weiland F; Freudenthaler J
    Aesthetic Plast Surg; 2014 Aug; 38(4):620-31. PubMed ID: 24907097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Facial attractiveness of skeletal Class II patients before and after mandibular advancement surgery as perceived by people with different backgrounds.
    Ng D; De Silva RK; Smit R; De Silva H; Farella M
    Eur J Orthod; 2013 Aug; 35(4):515-20. PubMed ID: 22573907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Attractiveness assessment by orthodontists and laypeople judging female profile modifications of Class II Division 1 malocclusion.
    Kalin K; Iskender SY; Kuitert R
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2021 Aug; 160(2):276-282. PubMed ID: 34006425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.