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 *

105 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 39074835)

  • 21. Esthetic evaluation of lip position in silhouette with respect to profile divergence.
    Zarif Najafi H; Sabouri SA; Ebrahimi E; Torkan S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2016 Jun; 149(6):863-70. PubMed ID: 27241997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Differences in attractiveness comparing female profile modifications of Class II Division 1 malocclusion.
    Yüksel AG; Iskender SY; Kuitert R; Papadopoulou AK; Dalci K; Darendeliler MA; Dalci O
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Oct; 152(4):471-476. PubMed ID: 28962730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Orthodontists and lay people rate masculine soft tissue profiles similarly but feminine soft tissue profiles differently.
    Einy S; Miri T; Katzhendler E; Aizenbud D; Emanuela K; Zaslansky P
    Quintessence Int; 2021; 52(1):72-79. PubMed ID: 32954390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Anteroposterior lip positions of the most-favored Japanese facial profiles.
    Ioi H; Nakata S; Nakasima A; Counts AL
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Aug; 128(2):206-11. PubMed ID: 16102406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [Investigation on facial profile preferences of orthodontic patients].
    Wang YY; Guo CC; Zhou C; Fan ML; Wang WC; Bao BC
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2012 Dec; 21(6):668-72. PubMed ID: 23364553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Silhouette profiles in the assessment of facial esthetics: a comparison of cases treated with various orthodontic appliances.
    Barrer JG; Ghafari J
    Am J Orthod; 1985 May; 87(5):385-91. PubMed ID: 3857863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Esthetic perception of facial profile changes in Class II patients treated with Herbst or Forsus appliances.
    Moresca AHK; de Moraes ND; Topolski F; Flores-Mir C; Moro A; Moresca RC; Correr GM
    Angle Orthod; 2020 Jul; 90(4):571-577. PubMed ID: 33378491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Esthetic preferences of orthodontists, oral surgeons, and laypersons for Persian facial profiles.
    Imani MM; Sanei E; Niaki EA; Shahroudi AS
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2018 Sep; 154(3):412-420. PubMed ID: 30173845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Influence of chin prominence on esthetic lip profile preferences.
    Coleman GG; Lindauer SJ; Tüfekçi E; Shroff B; Best AM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Jul; 132(1):36-42. PubMed ID: 17628248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. [Aesthetic evaluation of nasolabial angle alteration on the soft tissue profile of skeleton class I].
    Xu A; Deng F; Wang F; Zhang X; Zhang Y
    Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2015 Oct; 33(5):492-6. PubMed ID: 26688942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. A non-cephalometric two-dimensional appraisal of soft tissue changes by functional therapy in Class II patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Luyten J; Vierendeel M; De Roo NMC; Temmerman L; De Pauw GAM
    Eur J Orthod; 2022 Sep; 44(5):503-512. PubMed ID: 35064669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Photos vs silhouettes for evaluation of profile esthetics between white and black evaluators.
    Pithon MM; Silva IS; Almeida IO; Nery MS; de Souza ML; Barbosa G; Dos Santos AF; da Silva Coqueiro R
    Angle Orthod; 2014 Mar; 84(2):231-8. PubMed ID: 23957665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Influence of Lip Projection and Chin Position on Facial Profile Preferences Among Various Layers of Polish Population. Part 1.
    Adamek A; Sarul M; Lis J; Kobiela Z; Kiełczawa M; Semeniuk F
    Clin Cosmet Investig Dent; 2022; 14():253-263. PubMed ID: 36093269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Perceived treatment need in patients with different facial profiles.
    Suphatheerawatr T; Chamnannidiadha N
    J World Fed Orthod; 2020 Jun; 9(2):75-79. PubMed ID: 32672658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Factors associated with the beauty of soft-tissue profile.
    Ghorbanyjavadpour F; Rakhshan V
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2019 Jun; 155(6):832-843. PubMed ID: 31153504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Lateral facial profile may reveal the risk for sleep disordered breathing in children--the PANIC-study.
    Ikävalko T; Närhi M; Lakka T; Myllykangas R; Tuomilehto H; Vierola A; Pahkala R
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2015; 73(7):550-5. PubMed ID: 25892581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Influence of upper lip inclination on facial profile attractiveness: A perceptive analysis.
    Bora P; Agrawal P; Bagga DK; Priya K; Singh N; Bhardwaj R
    J Orthod Sci; 2024; 13():8. PubMed ID: 38516111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.