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: 38183059)

  • 21. Influence of lip position on esthetics perception with respect to profile divergence using silhouette images.
    Alshammari AK; Algharbi MA; Alshammari SK; Alenzi AA; Malik YR; Abideen MZ; Siddiqui AA; Madfa AA
    BMC Oral Health; 2023 Oct; 23(1):791. PubMed ID: 37875850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Cephalometric soft tissue facial analysis.
    Bergman RT
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1999 Oct; 116(4):373-89. PubMed ID: 10511665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [Evaluation of lower facial esthetics in females with different skeletal patterns].
    Zhang KK; Yang SY; Geng YD; Xiao WW; Peng HZ
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2020 Jun; 55(6):388-393. PubMed ID: 32486568
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The frontal soft tissue changes in the lower facial portion after orthodontic treatment combined with anterior segmental osteotomy.
    Cha YM; Park NS; Bayome M; Han SH; Kim Y; Kook YA
    Orthodontics (Chic.); 2011; 12(3):232-41. PubMed ID: 22022694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Correlations between cephalometric and photographic measurements of facial attractiveness in Chinese and US patients after orthodontic treatment.
    Oh HS; Korn EL; Zhang X; Liu Y; Xu T; Boyd R; Baumrind S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Dec; 136(6):762.e1-14; discussion 762-3. PubMed ID: 19962590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Soft tissue outcome after mandibular advancement--an anthropometric evaluation of 171 consecutive patients.
    Raschke GF; Rieger UM; Bader RD; Guentsch A; Schaefer O; Schultze-Mosgau S
    Clin Oral Investig; 2013 Jun; 17(5):1415-23. PubMed ID: 22893037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. White spot lesion-related perception of aesthetics and treatment satisfaction among orthodontic patients, orthodontists and other dental specialists.
    Huang X; Qin D; Ngan P; Cao L; Hua F; He H
    Orthod Craniofac Res; 2024 Aug; 27(4):626-634. PubMed ID: 38466047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Soft-tissue profile changes during widening and protraction of the maxilla in patients with cleft lip and palate compared with normal growth and development.
    Tindlund RS; Rygh P
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 1993 Sep; 30(5):454-68. PubMed ID: 8218309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Rating Nasolabial Aesthetics in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients: Cropped Versus Full-Face Images.
    Schwirtz RMF; Mulder FJ; Mosmuller DGM; Tan RA; Maal TJ; Prahl C; de Vet HCW; Don Griot JPW
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 2018 May; 55(5):747-752. PubMed ID: 29350971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Factors influencing soft tissue profile changes following orthodontic treatment in patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion.
    Maetevorakul S; Viteporn S
    Prog Orthod; 2016; 17():13. PubMed ID: 27135067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Angular photogrammetric analysis of the soft tissue facial profile of Turkish adults.
    Malkoç S; Demir A; Uysal T; Canbuldu N
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Apr; 31(2):174-9. PubMed ID: 19064675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Differences in facial profile and dental esthetic perceptions between young adults and orthodontists.
    Yin L; Jiang M; Chen W; Smales RJ; Wang Q; Tang L
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Jun; 145(6):750-6. PubMed ID: 24880845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Perceptions of a balanced facial profile.
    Czarnecki ST; Nanda RS; Currier GF
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1993 Aug; 104(2):180-7. PubMed ID: 8338071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Relationships between facial features in the perception of profile attractiveness.
    Torsello F; Graci M; Grande NM; Deli R
    Prog Orthod; 2010; 11(2):92-7. PubMed ID: 20974445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Antero-posterior and vertical facial type variations influence the aesthetic preference of the antero-posterior lip positions.
    Murakami T; Kataoka T; Tagawa J; Yamashiro T; Kamioka H
    Eur J Orthod; 2016 Aug; 38(4):414-21. PubMed ID: 26453593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The perception of facial aesthetics in a young Spanish population.
    Macías Gago AB; Romero Maroto M; Crego A
    Eur J Orthod; 2012 Jun; 34(3):335-9. PubMed ID: 21447783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Comparison of Antero-Posterior Lip Position in Most Favored Facial Profile of Jaipur Population.
    Sharma K; Trehan M; Singh S; Mahlawat H; Kenkare P; Jayavarma S A
    Cureus; 2022 Aug; 14(8):e27774. PubMed ID: 36106287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Three dimensional quantitative study of soft tissue changes in nasolabial folds after orthodontic treatment in female adults.
    Zhou Q; Gao J; Guo D; Zhang H; Zhang X; Qin W; Jin Z
    BMC Oral Health; 2023 Jan; 23(1):31. PubMed ID: 36658527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Improving lip aesthetics in the face profile after treatment of class II, division 2 malocclusion.
    Koniarova Z; Husarova R; Stefkova M; Spidlen M; Statelova D; Janickova M; Koniarova A
    Bratisl Lek Listy; 2022; 123(3):185-190. PubMed ID: 35343750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.