159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9442430)
1. A comparison of manual and controlled-force attachment-level measurements.
Reddy MS; Palcanis KG; Geurs NC
J Clin Periodontol; 1997 Dec; 24(12):920-6. PubMed ID: 9442430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of measurement variability in subjects with moderate periodontitis using a conventional and constant force periodontal probe.
Osborn JB; Stoltenberg JL; Huso BA; Aeppli DM; Pihlstrom BL
J Periodontol; 1992 Apr; 63(4):283-9. PubMed ID: 1573541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of measurement variability using a standard and constant force periodontal probe.
Osborn J; Stoltenberg J; Huso B; Aeppli D; Pihlstrom B
J Periodontol; 1990 Aug; 61(8):497-503. PubMed ID: 2391627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Measurement of clinical attachment levels using a constant-force periodontal probe modified to detect the cemento-enamel junction.
Preshaw PM; Kupp L; Hefti AF; Mariotti A
J Clin Periodontol; 1999 Jul; 26(7):434-40. PubMed ID: 10412847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of manual and automated probing in an untreated periodontitis population.
Oringer RJ; Fiorellini JP; Koch GG; Sharp TJ; Nevins ML; Davis GH; Howell TH
J Periodontol; 1997 Dec; 68(12):1156-62. PubMed ID: 9444589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Intra - and inter-examiner reproducibility in constant force probing.
Wang SF; Leknes KN; Zimmerman GJ; Sigurdsson TJ; Wikesjö UM; Selvig KA
J Clin Periodontol; 1995 Dec; 22(12):918-22. PubMed ID: 8613559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Clinical evaluation of electronic and manual constant force probes.
Khocht A; Chang KM
J Periodontol; 1998 Jan; 69(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 9527557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Sources of error for periodontal probing measurements.
Grossi SG; Dunford RG; Ho A; Koch G; Machtei EE; Genco RJ
J Periodontal Res; 1996 Jul; 31(5):330-6. PubMed ID: 8858537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Reproducibility of attachment level measurements with two models of the Florida Probe.
Marks RG; Low SB; Taylor M; Baggs R; Magnusson I; Clark WB
J Clin Periodontol; 1991 Nov; 18(10):780-4. PubMed ID: 1753003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reliability of single and double probing attachment level measurements.
Zappa U; Simona C; Graf H; Case D; Thomas J
J Clin Periodontol; 1995 Oct; 22(10):764-71. PubMed ID: 8682923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Periodontal probe precision using 4 different periodontal probes.
Mayfield L; Bratthall G; Attström R
J Clin Periodontol; 1996 Feb; 23(2):76-82. PubMed ID: 8849842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reproducibility of an electronic probe in relative attachment level measurements.
Yang MC; Marks RG; Magnusson I; Clouser B; Clark WB
J Clin Periodontol; 1992 Sep; 19(8):541-8. PubMed ID: 1447378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Accuracy of probing attachment levels using a CEJ probe versus traditional probes.
Karpinia K; Magnusson I; Gibbs C; Yang MC
J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Mar; 31(3):173-6. PubMed ID: 15016020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Interexaminer reliability of the assessment of clinical furcation parameters as related to different probes.
Eickholz P; Steinbrenner H; Lenhard M; Marquardt M; Holle R
Eur J Oral Sci; 1999 Feb; 107(1):2-8. PubMed ID: 10102744
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Inter- and intra-examiner variability using standard and constant force periodontal probes.
Walsh TF; Saxby MS
J Clin Periodontol; 1989 Mar; 16(3):140-3. PubMed ID: 2723096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Reproducibility of clinical attachment level and probing depth of a manual probe and a computerized electronic probe.
Alves Rde V; Machion L; Andia DC; Casati MZ; Sallum AW; Sallum EA
J Int Acad Periodontol; 2005 Jan; 7(1):27-30. PubMed ID: 15736893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Site-specific attachment level change detected by physical probing in untreated chronic adult periodontitis: review of studies 1982-1997.
Breen HJ; Johnson NW; Rogers PA
J Periodontol; 1999 Mar; 70(3):312-28. PubMed ID: 10225549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The rate of periodontal attachment loss in subjects with established periodontitis.
Machtei EE; Norderyd J; Koch G; Dunford R; Grossi S; Genco RJ
J Periodontol; 1993 Aug; 64(8):713-8. PubMed ID: 8410609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Important differences in clinical data from third, second, and first generation periodontal probes.
Breen HJ; Rogers PA; Lawless HC; Austin JS; Johnson NW
J Periodontol; 1997 Apr; 68(4):335-45. PubMed ID: 9150038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Description and clinical evaluation of a new computerized periodontal probe--the Florida probe.
Gibbs CH; Hirschfeld JW; Lee JG; Low SB; Magnusson I; Thousand RR; Yerneni P; Clark WB
J Clin Periodontol; 1988 Feb; 15(2):137-44. PubMed ID: 3162246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
