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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

205 related items for PubMed ID: 10460963

  • 1. Dyract versus Tytin Class II restorations in primary molars: 36 months evaluation.
    Marks LA, Weerheijm KL, van Amerongen WE, Groen HJ, Martens LC.
    Caries Res; 1999; 33(5):387-92. PubMed ID: 10460963
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Conservative interproximal box-only polyacid modified composite restorations in primary molars, twelve-month clinical results.
    Marks LA, van Amerongen WE, Kreulen CM, Weerheijm KL, Martens LC.
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1999; 66(1):23-9, 12. PubMed ID: 10360200
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Clinical performance of a compomer and amalgam for the interproximal restoration of primary molars: a 24-month evaluation.
    Duggal MS, Toumba KJ, Sharma NK.
    Br Dent J; 2002 Sep 28; 193(6):339-42. PubMed ID: 12368893
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Dental fillings for the treatment of caries in the primary dentition.
    Yengopal V, Harneker SY, Patel N, Siegfried N.
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2009 Apr 15; (2):CD004483. PubMed ID: 19370602
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Ketac Molar Versus Dyract Class II restorations in primary molars: twelve month clinical results.
    Marks LA, van Amerongen WE, Borgmeijer PJ, Groen HJ, Martens LC.
    ASDC J Dent Child; 2000 Apr 15; 67(1):37-41, 8-9. PubMed ID: 10736656
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. WITHDRAWN: Dental fillings for the treatment of caries in the primary dentition.
    Yengopal V, Harnekar SY, Patel N, Siegfried N.
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2016 Oct 17; 10(10):CD004483. PubMed ID: 27748505
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results.
    Pascon FM, Kantovitz KR, Caldo-Teixeira AS, Borges AF, Silva TN, Puppin-Rontani RM, Garcia-Godoy F.
    J Dent; 2006 Jul 17; 34(6):381-8. PubMed ID: 16242232
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Clinical evaluation of Dyract in primary molars: 3-year results.
    Roeters JJ, Frankenmolen F, Burgersdijk RC, Peters TC.
    Am J Dent; 1998 Jun 17; 11(3):143-8. PubMed ID: 9823078
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Assessment of compomer proximal restorations in primary molars: a retrospective study in children.
    Mass E, Gordon M, Fuks AB.
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1999 Jun 17; 66(2):93-7, 84. PubMed ID: 10431617
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. A 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a composite and a compomer/composite (sandwich) in class II restorations.
    Wucher M, Grobler SR, Senekal PJ.
    Am J Dent; 2002 Aug 17; 15(4):274-8. PubMed ID: 12572648
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Compomers as Class II restorations in primary molars.
    Gross LC, Griffen AL, Casamassimo PS.
    Pediatr Dent; 2001 Aug 17; 23(1):24-7. PubMed ID: 11242726
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Five-year double-blind randomized clinical evaluation of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a polyacid-modified resin in noncarious cervical lesions.
    Loguercio AD, Reis A, Barbosa AN, Roulet JF.
    J Adhes Dent; 2003 Aug 17; 5(4):323-32. PubMed ID: 15008339
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Clinical evaluation of polyacid-modified resin composite posterior restorations: one-year results.
    Luo Y, Lo EC, Fang DT, Wei SH.
    Quintessence Int; 2000 Oct 17; 31(9):630-6. PubMed ID: 11203987
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Durability of a polyacid-modified composite resin (compomer) in primary molars. A multicenter study.
    Andersson-Wenckert IE, Folkesson UH, van Dijken JW.
    Acta Odontol Scand; 1997 Aug 17; 55(4):255-60. PubMed ID: 9298168
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Surface texture and enamel-restoration interface of glass ionomer restorations.
    Sepet E, Aytepe Z, Oray H.
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 1997 Aug 17; 21(3):231-5. PubMed ID: 9484132
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Clinical evaluation of a compomer and an amalgam primary teeth class II restorations: a 2-year comparative study.
    Kavvadia K, Kakaboura A, Vanderas AP, Papagiannoulis L.
    Pediatr Dent; 2004 Aug 17; 26(3):245-50. PubMed ID: 15185806
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Clinical evaluation of four different dental restorative materials: one-year results.
    Daou MH, Tavernier B, Meyer JM.
    Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 2008 Aug 17; 118(4):290-5. PubMed ID: 18491670
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Clinical evaluation of paired compomer and glass ionomer restorations in primary molars: final results after 42 months.
    Welbury RR, Shaw AJ, Murray JJ, Gordon PH, McCabe JF.
    Br Dent J; 2000 Jul 22; 189(2):93-7. PubMed ID: 10975160
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract) in class III cavities: three-year results.
    Demirci M, Ersev H, Uçok M.
    Oper Dent; 2002 Jul 22; 27(3):223-30. PubMed ID: 12022451
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Clinical evaluation of Class II combined amalgam-composite restorations in primary molars after 6 to 30 months.
    Holan G, Chosack A, Eidelman E.
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1996 Jul 22; 63(5):341-5. PubMed ID: 8958346
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 11.