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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6929162)

  • 21. The effects of differences in landmark identification on the cephalometric measurements in traditional versus digitized cephalometry.
    Chen YJ; Chen SK; Yao JC; Chang HF
    Angle Orthod; 2004 Apr; 74(2):155-61. PubMed ID: 15132440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Evaluation of rare earth intensifying screens in cephalometric radiography.
    Stathopoulos V; Poulton DR
    Angle Orthod; 1990; 60(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 2180348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Comparison of xeroradiographs and film for detection of periapical lesions.
    White SC; Hollender L; Gratt BM
    J Dent Res; 1984 Jun; 63(6):910-3. PubMed ID: 6588078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Film and xeroradiographic images in mammography. A comparison of tungsten and molybdenum anode materials.
    Evans AL; James WB; McLellan J; Davison M
    Br J Radiol; 1975 Dec; 48(576):968-72. PubMed ID: 1218357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Patient radiation dose in conventional and xerographic cephalography.
    Copley RL; Glaze SA; Bushong SC; West DC
    Am J Orthod; 1979 Nov; 76(5):505-10. PubMed ID: 292313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Effect of head orientation on posterior anterior cephalometric landmark identification.
    Major PW; Johnson DE; Hesse KL; Glover KE
    Angle Orthod; 1996; 66(1):51-60. PubMed ID: 8678346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Is there consistency in cephalometric landmark identification amongst oral and maxillofacial surgeons?
    Miloro M; Borba AM; Ribeiro-Junior O; Naclério-Homem MG; Jungner M
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2014 Apr; 43(4):445-53. PubMed ID: 24055177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. [Teleradiography and xerography in profile incidence].
    Bonneau E; Benoist M
    Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac; 1982; 83(2-3):107-10. PubMed ID: 6954614
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Effects of image enhancement on reliability of landmark identification in digital cephalometry.
    Oshagh M; Shahidi SH; Danaei SH
    Indian J Dent Res; 2013; 24(1):98-103. PubMed ID: 23852241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Phosphor-stimulated computed cephalometry: reliability of landmark identification.
    Lim KF; Foong KW
    Br J Orthod; 1997 Nov; 24(4):301-8. PubMed ID: 9459029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The role of xeroradiography in cephalometric radiology.
    Davis R; Binnie WH; Cawson RA; Reed RT; Stacey AJ
    J Dent; 1977 Mar; 5(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 269125
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Xeroradiography of dental structures. I. Preliminary investigations.
    Gratt BM; Sickles EA; Parks CP
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1977 Jul; 44(1):148-52. PubMed ID: 267873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Sensitometric characteristics of dental xeroradiography.
    Gratt BM; Sickles EA
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1983 Nov; 56(5):555-9. PubMed ID: 6580602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Xeroradiography and ionography: new technologies to replace the x-ray film.
    Allan FV; Reiss KH
    Med Prog Technol; 1976 Apr; 3(4):143-8. PubMed ID: 934037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparison of reliability in anatomical landmark identification using two-dimensional digital cephalometrics and three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography in vivo.
    Chien PC; Parks ET; Eraso F; Hartsfield JK; Roberts WE; Ofner S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Jul; 38(5):262-73. PubMed ID: 19474253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) craniofacial cephalometric landmarks on a low-dose 3D computed tomograph.
    Olszewski R; Reychler H; Cosnard G; Denis JM; Vynckier S; Zech F
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Jul; 37(5):261-7. PubMed ID: 18606747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. A comparison of scanned lateral cephalograms with corresponding original radiographs.
    Bruntz LQ; Palomo JM; Baden S; Hans MG
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Sep; 130(3):340-8. PubMed ID: 16979492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Analysis of low-dose digital lateral cephalometric radiographs.
    Näslund EB; Kruger M; Petersson A; Hansen K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1998 May; 27(3):136-9. PubMed ID: 9693525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Intraoral xeroradiography.
    White SC; Stafford ML; Beeninga LR
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1978 Dec; 46(6):862-70. PubMed ID: 282550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Radiologic exposure conditions and resultant skin doses in application of xeroradiography to the orthodontic diagnosis.
    Nakasima A; Nakata S; Shimizu K; Takahama Y
    Am J Orthod; 1980 Dec; 78(6):646-56. PubMed ID: 6935964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.