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.
6. The effect of tray selection, viscosity of impression material, and sequence of pour on the accuracy of dies made from dual-arch impressions. Ceyhan JA, Johnson GH, Lepe X. J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):143-9. PubMed ID: 12886207 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The effect of impression volume and double-arch trays on the registration of maximum intercuspation. Hahn SM, Millstein PL, Kinnunen TH, Wright RF. J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Dec; 102(6):362-7. PubMed ID: 19961994 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Accuracy of open tray implant impressions: an in vitro comparison of stock versus custom trays. Burns J, Palmer R, Howe L, Wilson R. J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):250-5. PubMed ID: 12644799 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Accuracy of complete dental arch impressions and stone casts using a three-dimensional measurement system. Effects on accuracy of rubber impression materials and trays. Ishida K. Dent Jpn (Tokyo); 1990 Mar; 27(1):73-9. PubMed ID: 2099294 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]