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.
24. 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]
25. Comparison of wear and clinical performance between amalgam, composite and open sandwich restorations: 2-year results. Sachdeo A; Gray GB; Sulieman MA; Jagger DC Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2004 Mar; 12(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 15058177 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Anaerobic microflora under Class I and Class II composite and amalgam restorations. Splieth C; Bernhardt O; Heinrich A; Bernhardt H; Meyer G Quintessence Int; 2003; 34(7):497-503. PubMed ID: 12946067 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Factors influencing dentists' choice of amalgam and tooth-colored restorative materials for Class II preparations in younger patients. Vidnes-Kopperud S; Tveit AB; Gaarden T; Sandvik L; Espelid I Acta Odontol Scand; 2009; 67(2):74-9. PubMed ID: 19085213 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Is there a difference in the reliable measurement of temporomandibular disorder signs between experienced and inexperienced examiners? Leher A; Graf K; PhoDuc JM; Rammelsberg P J Orofac Pain; 2005; 19(1):58-64. PubMed ID: 15779540 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [Differences in the assessment of restorative dental care]. Poorterman JH; Kieft JA; Eijkman MA Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2002 Sep; 109(9):355-7. PubMed ID: 12357667 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Accuracy of measurement of clinical performance in dentistry. Houpt MI; Kress G J Dent Educ; 1973 Jul; 37(7):34-46. PubMed ID: 4514565 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Corrosion potential variation of aged dental amalgam restorations over time. Sutow EJ; Maillet WA; Hall GC Dent Mater; 2006 Apr; 22(4):325-9. PubMed ID: 16084580 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. National oral health survey Zimbabwe 1995: quality of restorations. Frencken JE; Sithole WD SADJ; 1998 Sep; 53(8):435-8. PubMed ID: 10518906 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Estimating the weight of dental amalgam restorations. Adegbembo AO; Watson PA; Rokni S J Can Dent Assoc; 2004 Jan; 70(1):30. PubMed ID: 14709252 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The effects of amalgam restorations on plasma mercury levels and total antioxidant activity. Nur Ozdabak H; Karaoğlanoğlu S; Akgül N; Polat F; Seven N Arch Oral Biol; 2008 Dec; 53(12):1101-6. PubMed ID: 18790473 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Simple task elimination and training outcome in an amalgam carving procedure. Peterson DS; Wood DK Educ Dir Dent Aux; 1977; 2(4):17-21. PubMed ID: 288578 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Outcome of direct restorations placed within the general dental services in England and Wales (Part 1): variation by type of restoration and re-intervention. Lucarotti PS; Holder RL; Burke FJ J Dent; 2005 Nov; 33(10):805-15. PubMed ID: 16221519 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Evaluation of an indirect method for assessing the quality of amalgam restorations in epidemiological studies. Kroeze J; Ruiken R; van 't Hof M Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 1988 Aug; 16(4):208-11. PubMed ID: 3165745 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Standardizing evaluations of the clinical marginal fracture of amalgam. Mahler DB; Engle JH; Bryant RW J Dent Res; 1986 Aug; 65(8):1108-11. PubMed ID: 3461027 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. [Quality control of amalgam restorations. II. A comparison of 4 non-clinical review methods]. Borgmeyer PJ; Advocaat JG; Akerboom HB Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1982 Oct; 89(10):397-404. PubMed ID: 6960261 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]