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 *

102 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8439526)

  • 1. A comparison of five different methods for describing sagittal jaw relationship.
    Kirchner J; Williams S
    Br J Orthod; 1993 Feb; 20(1):13-7. PubMed ID: 8439526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A new approach of assessing sagittal discrepancies: the Beta angle.
    Baik CY; Ververidou M
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2004 Jul; 126(1):100-5. PubMed ID: 15224065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A new approach of assessing sagittal dysplasia: the W angle.
    Bhad WA; Nayak S; Doshi UH
    Eur J Orthod; 2013 Feb; 35(1):66-70. PubMed ID: 21303811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. An evaluation of the Pi analysis in the assessment of anteroposterior jaw relationship.
    Kumar S; Valiathan A; Gautam P; Chakravarthy K; Jayaswal P
    J Orthod; 2012 Dec; 39(4):262-9. PubMed ID: 23269690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A new sagittal dysplasia indicator: the YEN angle.
    Neela PK; Mascarenhas R; Husain A
    World J Orthod; 2009; 10(2):147-51. PubMed ID: 19582259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Cephalometric study to test the reliability of anteroposterior skeletal discrepancy indicators using the twin block appliance.
    Trivedi R; Bhattacharya A; Mehta F; Patel D; Parekh H; Gandhi V
    Prog Orthod; 2015 Feb; 16():3. PubMed ID: 25769138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Differences in skeletal Class II diagnosis using various cephalometric analyses.
    Contardo L; Ceschi M; Castaldo A; Denotti G; Di Lenarda R
    J Clin Orthod; 2008 Jul; 42(7):389-92. PubMed ID: 18794575
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Magnetic resonance imaging-verified temporomandibular joint disk displacement in relation to sagittal and vertical jaw deformities.
    Jung WS; Kim H; Jeon DM; Mah SJ; Ahn SJ
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2013 Sep; 42(9):1108-15. PubMed ID: 23618835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessment of anteroposterior jaw relationship.
    Chang HP
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1987 Aug; 92(2):117-22. PubMed ID: 3475966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Class II division 2 skeletal pattern.
    Brezniak N; Arad A; Heler M; Wasserstein A
    Angle Orthod; 1998 Apr; 68(2):104. PubMed ID: 9564418
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Craniofacial parameters of Syrian children with β-thalassemia major.
    Takriti M; Dashash M
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 May; 2(2):135-43. PubMed ID: 25426607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Glenoid fossa position in Class II malocclusion associated with mandibular retrusion.
    Giuntini V; De Toffol L; Franchi L; Baccetti T
    Angle Orthod; 2008 Sep; 78(5):808-12. PubMed ID: 18298205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mandibular form and position in 10-year-old boys.
    Kerr WJ; Miller S; Ayme B; Wilhelm N
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1994 Aug; 106(2):115-20. PubMed ID: 8059745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Anteroposterior dental arch and jaw-base relationships in a population sample.
    Zhou L; Mok CW; Hägg U; McGrath C; Bendeus M; Wu J
    Angle Orthod; 2008 Nov; 78(6):1023-9. PubMed ID: 18947277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparative cephalometric study of Class II division 1 malocclusion between Lithuanian and Jordanian females.
    Bader BA; Vasiliauskas A; Qadri AS
    Stomatologija; 2008; 10(1):44-8. PubMed ID: 18493165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessing skeletal relationships using the cervical vertebral curvature.
    Shaikh A; Khan M; Rashna HS
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2011; 22(4):27-31. PubMed ID: 22360079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Assessment of skeletal and dental pattern of Class II division 1 malocclusion with relevance to clinical practice.
    Sidlauskas A; Svalkauskiene V; Sidlauskas M
    Stomatologija; 2006; 8(1):3-8. PubMed ID: 16687908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of Beta and ANB Angles for Evaluation of Sagittal Skeletal Discrepancy: A Cephalometric Study.
    Jajoo A; Agarkar SS; Sharma S; Gadhiya N; Sonawane S; Narkhede S
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2018 Jun; 19(6):739-742. PubMed ID: 29959305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sagittal and vertical effects of transverse sagittal maxillary expander (TSME) in three different malocclusion groups.
    Maspero C; Galbiati G; Giannini L; Farronato G
    Prog Orthod; 2015 Apr; 16():6. PubMed ID: 25907431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The variability of some craniofacial dimensions.
    Kerr WJ; Ford I
    Angle Orthod; 1991; 61(3):205-10. PubMed ID: 1928822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.