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.
11. [Evaluation of the marginal sealing capacity of composite and conventional materials for filling of tissue defects; in vitro studies]. Wasik A; Bobowicz Z Protet Stomatol; 1977; 27(2):175. PubMed ID: 270176 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The composite resin restoration: a literature review. Part II. Comparisons between composite and alloy restorations. Full CA; Hollander WR ASDC J Dent Child; 1993; 60(1):52-6. PubMed ID: 8432948 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. How independent are those independent studies? Brandstatter R CDS Rev; 2006; 99(5):5. PubMed ID: 17036621 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Observations on a composite resin for class II restorations: two-year report. Phillips RW; Avery DR; Mehra R; Swartz ML; McCune RJ J Prosthet Dent; 1972 Aug; 28(2):164-9. PubMed ID: 4504300 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Re-intervention in glass ionomer restorations: what comes next? Burke FJ; Lucarotti PS J Dent; 2009 Jan; 37(1):39-43. PubMed ID: 18819740 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [In vivo wear of posterior composites and its counterplan before or after insertion]. Hosoda H Kokubyo Gakkai Zasshi; 1985 Jun; 52(2):195-209. PubMed ID: 3862715 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparison of in vivo and in vitro microleakage of dental restorations. McCurdy CR; Swartz ML; Phillips RW; Rhodes BF J Am Dent Assoc; 1974 Mar; 88(3):592-602. PubMed ID: 4204384 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]