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 *

134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3465233)

  • 41. Skeletal and dentoalveolar changes concurrent to use of Twin Block appliance in class II division I cases with a deficient mandible: a cephalometric study.
    Sharma AK; Sachdev V; Singla A; Kirtaniya BC
    J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2012; 30(3):218-26. PubMed ID: 23263425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. An evaluation of the morphogenic and anatomic effects of the functional regulator utilizing the counterpart analysis.
    Enlow DH; DiGangi D; McNamara JA; Mina M
    Eur J Orthod; 1988 Aug; 10(3):192-202. PubMed ID: 3181298
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. [Comparative study between medieval (12th -14th c.) and modern skulls samples of five cranio-facial measures].
    Esclassan R; Noirrit E; Guyonnet JJ; Lodter C
    Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac; 2006 Feb; 107(1):17-22. PubMed ID: 16523172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Geometric influence of the sagittal and vertical apical base relationship on the ANB angle.
    Sadat-Khonsari R; Dathe H; Knösel M; Hahn W; Kubein-Meesenburg D; Bauss O
    J Orofac Orthop; 2009 Mar; 70(2):152-8. PubMed ID: 19322533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Angles of facial convexity in different skeletal Classes.
    Godt A; Müller A; Kalwitzki M; Göz G
    Eur J Orthod; 2007 Dec; 29(6):648-53. PubMed ID: 17878186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Age-related changes in sagittal relationship between the maxilla and mandible.
    Lux CJ; Burden D; Conradt C; Komposch G
    Eur J Orthod; 2005 Dec; 27(6):568-78. PubMed ID: 16093257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Cephalometric norms in an Arabic population.
    Hamdan AM; Rock WP
    J Orthod; 2001 Dec; 28(4):297-300. PubMed ID: 11709595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Cephalometric superimpositions.
    Gu Y; McNamara JA
    Angle Orthod; 2008 Nov; 78(6):967-76. PubMed ID: 18947269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Age-dependant cephalometric standards as determined by multilevel modeling.
    van Diepenbeek AF; Buschang PH; Prahl-Andersen B
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jan; 135(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 19121505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Permutation method for evaluating topographic craniofacial correlations.
    Halazonetis DJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Mar; 139(3):e211-7. PubMed ID: 21392664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. The relationship and reproducibility of angle ANB and the Wits appraisal.
    Rushton R; Cohen AM; Linney AD
    Br J Orthod; 1991 Aug; 18(3):225-31. PubMed ID: 1931857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Skeletal and dento-alveolar norms: Conventional and based on true vertical in a Lebanese population.
    El Hayeck E; Bassil-Nassif N; Mouhanna-Fattal C; Bouserhal J
    Int Orthod; 2017 Jun; 15(2):180-198. PubMed ID: 28457918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. A new sagittal dysplasia indicator: the YEN angle.
    Neela PK; Mascarenhas R; Husain A
    World J Orthod; 2009; 10(2):147-51. PubMed ID: 19582259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. The wits appraisal using three reference planes and its interaction with the ANB angle among a sub-set of Nigerians".
    Ifesanya JU; Adeyemi AT; Otuyemi OD
    Afr J Med Med Sci; 2014 Sep; 43(3):225-30. PubMed ID: 26223140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Cephalometric evaluation of the effects of the Twin Block appliance in subjects with Class II, Division 1 malocclusion amongst different cervical vertebral maturation stages.
    Khoja A; Fida M; Shaikh A
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2016 Jun; 21(3):73-84. PubMed ID: 27409656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. 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]  

  • 57. Dentocraniofacial morphology of 12 Japanese subjects with unilateral cleft lip and palate with a severe Class III malocclusion: a cephalometric study at the pretreatment stage of surgical orthodontic treatment.
    Tateishi C; Moriyama K; Takano-Yamamoto T
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 2001 Nov; 38(6):597-605. PubMed ID: 11681993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. A comparison of arch widths in adults with normal occlusion and adults with class II, Division 1 malocclusion.
    Staley RN; Stuntz WR; Peterson LC
    Am J Orthod; 1985 Aug; 88(2):163-9. PubMed ID: 3861102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Correlations among craniofacial angles and dimensions in Class I and Class II malocclusions.
    Anderson D; Popovich F
    Angle Orthod; 1989; 59(1):37-42. PubMed ID: 2923320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. [Diagnostic efficacy of cephalometry for Class II/1].
    Matthey F; Lang R; Joho JP
    Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 1989; 99(6):658-69. PubMed ID: 2672303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.