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 *

178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36334784)

  • 41. Local accuracy of actual intraoral scanning systems for single-tooth preparations in vitro.
    Zimmermann M; Ender A; Mehl A
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2020 Feb; 151(2):127-135. PubMed ID: 31883705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. The effect of software updates on the trueness and precision of intraoral scanners.
    Vág J; Renne W; Revell G; Ludlow M; Mennito A; Teich ST; Gutmacher Z
    Quintessence Int; 2021 Jun; 52(7):636-644. PubMed ID: 33749223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Comparison of conventional, photogrammetry, and intraoral scanning accuracy of complete-arch implant impression procedures evaluated with a coordinate measuring machine.
    Revilla-León M; Att W; Özcan M; Rubenstein J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Mar; 125(3):470-478. PubMed ID: 32386912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Accuracy evaluation of intraoral optical impressions: A clinical study using a reference appliance.
    Atieh MA; Ritter AV; Ko CC; Duqum I
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Sep; 118(3):400-405. PubMed ID: 28222869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. [Accuracy analysis of full-arch implant digital impressions when using a geometric feature].
    Ke YF; Zhang YP; Chen JK; Chen H; Wang Y; Sun YC
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2022 Feb; 57(2):162-167. PubMed ID: 35152652
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Comparison of the acquisition accuracy and digitizing noise of 9 intraoral and extraoral scanners: An objective method.
    Dupagne L; Tapie L; Lebon N; Mawussi B
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Nov; 128(5):1032-1040. PubMed ID: 33781577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. The Accuracy of Full-Arch Intraoral Optical Impressions (IOS): Clinical Pilot Study of the Influence of the Scan Strategy, Operator, and Intraoral Scanner.
    Cordaro M; Sailer I; Zarauz C; Liu X; Karasan D
    Int J Prosthodont; 2023 Dec; 36(6):689-696. PubMed ID: 38109389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision.
    Ender A; Mehl A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Feb; 109(2):121-8. PubMed ID: 23395338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Clinical Study of the Influence of Ambient Light Scanning Conditions on the Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of an Intraoral Scanner.
    Revilla-León M; Subramanian SG; Özcan M; Krishnamurthy VR
    J Prosthodont; 2020 Feb; 29(2):107-113. PubMed ID: 31860144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Influence of Liquid on the Tooth Surface on the Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners: An In Vitro Study.
    Chen Y; Zhai Z; Li H; Yamada S; Matsuoka T; Ono S; Nakano T
    J Prosthodont; 2022 Jan; 31(1):59-64. PubMed ID: 33829613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. The effect of different tooth preparation finishing procedures and immediate dentin sealing on the scanning accuracy of different intraoral scanners.
    Revilla-León M; Cascos-Sánchez R; Barmak AB; Kois JC; Gómez-Polo M
    J Dent; 2023 Mar; 130():104431. PubMed ID: 36682722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Prosthesis accuracy of fit on 3D-printed casts versus stone casts: A comparative study in the anterior maxilla.
    Abdeen L; Chen YW; Kostagianni A; Finkelman M; Papathanasiou A; Chochlidakis K; Papaspyridakos P
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2022 Dec; 34(8):1238-1246. PubMed ID: 36415927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Evaluation of repeatability of different alignment methods to obtain digital interocclusal records: An in vitro study.
    Garikano X; Amezua X; Iturrate M; Solaberrieta E
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Apr; 131(4):709-717. PubMed ID: 36115710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: A novel in vivo analysis method.
    Nedelcu R; Olsson P; Nyström I; Rydén J; Thor A
    J Dent; 2018 Feb; 69():110-118. PubMed ID: 29246490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Evaluation and comparison of the accuracy of three intraoral scanners for replicating a complete denture.
    Le Texier L; Nicolas E; Batisse C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Apr; 131(4):706.e1-706.e8. PubMed ID: 38310062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Influence of adjacent teeth on the accuracy of intraoral scanning systems for class II inlay preparation.
    Kim JH; Son SA; Lee H; Yoo YJ; Hong SJ; Park JK
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2022 Jul; 34(5):826-832. PubMed ID: 34608739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Feasibility of using an intraoral scanner for a complete-arch digital scan.
    Park GH; Son K; Lee KB
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 May; 121(5):803-810. PubMed ID: 30598314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Effect of Scanner Type and Scan Body Location on the Accuracy of Mandibular Complete-Arch Digital Implant Scans: An In Vitro Study.
    Çakmak G; Yilmaz H; Treviño Santos A; Kökat AM; Yilmaz B
    J Prosthodont; 2022 Jun; 31(5):419-426. PubMed ID: 34453466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Trueness of intraoral scanners in digitizing specific locations at the margin and intaglio surfaces of intracoronal preparations.
    Jin-Young Kim R; Benic GI; Park JM
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Dec; 126(6):779-786. PubMed ID: 33176925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Clinical comparative study on the accuracy of palatal rugae in models obtained by different impression materials and intraoral scanning.
    Gökmen Ş; Topsakal KG; Duran GS; Görgülü S
    Clin Oral Investig; 2024 Feb; 28(2):153. PubMed ID: 38366003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.