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 *

134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8399053)

  • 21. Reliability and accuracy of three different computerized cephalometric analysis software.
    Rusu O; Petcu AE; Drăgan E; Haba D; Moscalu M; Zetu IN
    Rev Med Chir Soc Med Nat Iasi; 2015; 119(1):248-56. PubMed ID: 25970975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Estimating distances on direct digital images and conventional radiographs.
    Versteeg KH; Sanderink GC; van Ginkel FC; van der Stelt PF
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1997 Apr; 128(4):439-43. PubMed ID: 9103793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on conventional film, hardcopy, and monitor-displayed images obtained by the storage phosphor technique.
    Geelen W; Wenzel A; Gotfredsen E; Kruger M; Hansson LG
    Eur J Orthod; 1998 Jun; 20(3):331-40. PubMed ID: 9699411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Automatic computerized radiographic identification of cephalometric landmarks.
    Rudolph DJ; Sinclair PM; Coggins JM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1998 Feb; 113(2):173-9. PubMed ID: 9484208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Accuracy of a commercially available digitizer: a new method for assessment of errors in linearity.
    Tourne LP
    Angle Orthod; 1996; 66(6):433-40. PubMed ID: 8974179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. A benchmark for comparison of dental radiography analysis algorithms.
    Wang CW; Huang CT; Lee JH; Li CH; Chang SW; Siao MJ; Lai TM; Ibragimov B; Vrtovec T; Ronneberger O; Fischer P; Cootes TF; Lindner C
    Med Image Anal; 2016 Jul; 31():63-76. PubMed ID: 26974042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A method for correction of radiographic errors in serial three-dimensional cephalometry.
    Rousset MM; Simonek F; Dubus JP
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Jan; 32(1):50-9. PubMed ID: 12820854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Accuracy of cephalometric landmarks on monitor-displayed radiographs with and without image emboss enhancement.
    Leonardi RM; Giordano D; Maiorana F; Greco M
    Eur J Orthod; 2010 Jun; 32(3):242-7. PubMed ID: 20022892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Comparing digital and conventional cephalometric radiographs.
    Cohen JM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Aug; 128(2):157-60. PubMed ID: 16102396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Evaluation of speed, repeatability, and reproducibility of digital radiography with manual versus computer-assisted cephalometric analyses.
    Uysal T; Baysal A; Yagci A
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Oct; 31(5):523-8. PubMed ID: 19443692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Digital image processing in cephalometric analysis.
    Jäger A; Döler W; Schormann T
    Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 1989; 99(1):19-23. PubMed ID: 2913641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A different way of record reproduction for use in computerized programs.
    Saborido S; Cacho A
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1996 Nov; 110(5):562-5. PubMed ID: 8922518
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Evaluation of the reliability of computerized profile cephalometric analysis.
    Ferreira JT; Telles Cde S
    Braz Dent J; 2002; 13(3):201-4. PubMed ID: 12428597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. [Intraoral radiographs of dental implants in the edentulous mandible].
    Meijer HJ; Steen WH; Bosman F
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1995 Jul; 102(7):258-62. PubMed ID: 11837109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Development of a system for craniofacial analysis from monitor-displayed digital images.
    Gotfredsen E; Kragskov J; Wenzel A
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Mar; 28(2):123-6. PubMed ID: 10522202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A comparison of the reproducibility of manual tracing and on-screen digitization for cephalometric profile variables.
    Dvortsin DP; Sandham A; Pruim GJ; Dijkstra PU
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Dec; 30(6):586-91. PubMed ID: 18719051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. A dual sensitivity screen system for TMJ image enhancement in cephalometric radiography: sensitometric evaluation.
    Wakoh M; Farman AG; Nishikawa K; Kuroyanagi K; Scarfe WC; Braun S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1995 Aug; 24(3):191-4. PubMed ID: 8617394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Assessment of an automated cephalometric analysis system.
    Forsyth DB; Davis DN
    Eur J Orthod; 1996 Oct; 18(5):471-8. PubMed ID: 8942096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Uncertainty in cephalometrics.
    Cohen AM
    Br J Orthod; 1984 Jan; 11(1):44-8. PubMed ID: 6584177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 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]  

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