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

232 related items for PubMed ID: 1397457

  • 21.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. Radiographic secondary caries prevalence in teeth with clinically defective restorations.
    Hewlett ER, Atchison KA, White SC, Flack V.
    J Dent Res; 1993 Dec; 72(12):1604-8. PubMed ID: 8254130
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28. Linear and logarithmic subtraction for detecting enamel subsurface demineralization.
    Haiter-Neto F, Ferreira RI, Tabchoury CP, Bóscolo FN.
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2005 May; 34(3):133-9. PubMed ID: 15897282
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29. Statistical contrast enhancement of subtraction images for radiographic caries diagnosis.
    Gröndahl HG, Gröndahl K, Okano T, Webber RL.
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1982 Feb; 53(2):219-23. PubMed ID: 7036033
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. Digital chest radiography: effect of temporal subtraction images on detection accuracy.
    Difazio MC, MacMahon H, Xu XW, Tsai P, Shiraishi J, Armato SG, Doi K.
    Radiology; 1997 Feb; 202(2):447-52. PubMed ID: 9015072
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Depth of occlusal caries assessed clinically, by conventional film radiographs, and by digitized, processed radiographs.
    Wenzel A, Fejerskov O, Kidd E, Joyston-Bechal S, Groeneveld A.
    Caries Res; 1990 Feb; 24(5):327-33. PubMed ID: 2261604
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35. Conventional, digital and contrast-enhanced bitewing radiographs in the decision to restore approximal carious lesions.
    Haak R, Wicht MJ, Noack MJ.
    Caries Res; 2001 Feb; 35(3):193-9. PubMed ID: 11385199
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. Diagnosis of secondary caries in esthetic restorations: influence of the incidence vertical angle of the X-ray beam.
    Moreira PL, Messora MR, Pereira SM, Almeida SM, Cruz AD.
    Braz Dent J; 2011 Feb; 22(2):129-33. PubMed ID: 21537586
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Effect of noise on the compressibility and diagnostic accuracy for caries detection of digital bitewing radiographs.
    Janhom A, van der Stelt PF, van Ginkel FC, Geraets WG.
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Jan; 28(1):6-12. PubMed ID: 10202472
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39. Sensitivity of various radiographic methods for detection of oral cancellous bone lesions.
    Parsell DE, Gatewood RS, Watts JD, Streckfus CF.
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Oct; 86(4):498-502. PubMed ID: 9798239
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40. Efficacy of sealing proximal early active lesions: an 18-month clinical study evaluated by conventional and subtraction radiography.
    Martignon S, Ekstrand KR, Ellwood R.
    Caries Res; 2006 Oct; 40(5):382-8. PubMed ID: 16946605
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 12.