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 *

112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3886882)

  • 1. Accuracy of stone casts produced by perforated trays and nonperforated trays.
    Woodward JD; Morris JC; Khan Z
    J Prosthet Dent; 1985 Mar; 53(3):347-50. PubMed ID: 3886882
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The influence of impression trays on the accuracy of stone casts poured from irreversible hydrocolloid impressions.
    Mendez AJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 1985 Sep; 54(3):383-8. PubMed ID: 3906093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of impressions made in perforated and nonperforated rimlock trays.
    Heartwell CM; Modjeski PJ; Mullins EE; Strader KH
    J Prosthet Dent; 1972 May; 27(5):494-500. PubMed ID: 4552702
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time.
    Thongthammachat S; Moore BK; Barco MT; Hovijitra S; Brown DT; Andres CJ
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Jun; 11(2):98-108. PubMed ID: 12087547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accuracy of complete dental arch impressions and stone casts using a three-dimensional measurement system. Effects on accuracy of rubber impression materials and trays.
    Ishida K
    Dent Jpn (Tokyo); 1990; 27(1):73-9. PubMed ID: 2099294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [The influence of form trays on the reproducibility of stone casts obtained from alginate impressions (author's transl)].
    Sandini MS; de Abreu D
    Estomatol Cult; 1975; 9(1):109-16. PubMed ID: 801872
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A historical review of hydrocolloids and an investigation of the dimensional accuracy of the new alginates for crown and bridge impressions when using stock trays.
    Hansson O; Eklund J
    Swed Dent J; 1984; 8(2):81-95. PubMed ID: 6377548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A randomized clinical trial to compare diagnostic casts made using plastic and metal trays.
    Damodara EK; Litaker MS; Rahemtulla F; McCracken MS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2010 Dec; 104(6):364-71. PubMed ID: 21095399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Measurement of the accuracy of dental working casts using a coordinate measuring machine.
    Potran M; Štrbac B; Puškar T; Hadžistević M; Hodolič J; Trifković B
    Vojnosanit Pregl; 2016 Oct; 73(10):895-903. PubMed ID: 29327892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The effects of custom tray material on the accuracy of master casts.
    Shafa S; Zaree Z; Mosharraf R
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Sep; 9(6):49-56. PubMed ID: 18784859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effect of tray selection, viscosity of impression material, and sequence of pour on the accuracy of dies made from dual-arch impressions.
    Ceyhan JA; Johnson GH; Lepe X
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):143-9. PubMed ID: 12886207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [The accuracy of stone casts. The development of a three-dimensional measurement system and the influence of tray design on alginate impressions].
    Fukunaga H
    Nihon Hotetsu Shika Gakkai Zasshi; 1987 Aug; 31(4):1021-35. PubMed ID: 3333570
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Dimensional differences in stone casts from trays made of different materials].
    Pamir AD
    Ankara Univ Hekim Fak Derg; 1987 May; 14(2):191-5. PubMed ID: 3331548
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Using double-poured alginate impressions to fabricate bleaching trays.
    Haywood VB; Powe A
    Oper Dent; 1998; 23(3):128-31. PubMed ID: 9656923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The effect of using custom or stock trays on the accuracy of gypsum casts.
    Rueda LJ; Sy-Muñoz JT; Naylor WP; Goodacre CJ; Swartz ML
    Int J Prosthodont; 1996; 9(4):367-73. PubMed ID: 8957875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Angle reproducibility and surface roughness of stone casts obtained from combined agar-alginate impressions].
    Ohta T
    Shika Zairyo Kikai; 1990 May; 9(3):401-11. PubMed ID: 2135530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Accuracy of open tray implant impressions: an in vitro comparison of stock versus custom trays.
    Burns J; Palmer R; Howe L; Wilson R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):250-5. PubMed ID: 12644799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Distortion of disposable plastic stock trays when used with putty vinyl polysiloxane impression materials.
    Cho GC; Chee WW
    J Prosthet Dent; 2004 Oct; 92(4):354-8. PubMed ID: 15507908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of implant angulation, material selection, and impression technique on impression accuracy: a preliminary laboratory study.
    Rutkunas V; Sveikata K; Savickas R
    Int J Prosthodont; 2012; 25(5):512-5. PubMed ID: 22930776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The influence of tray type and other variables on the palatal depth of casts made from irreversible hydrocolloid impressions.
    Frank RP; Thielke SM; Johnson GH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Jan; 87(1):15-22. PubMed ID: 11807479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.