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

265 related items for PubMed ID: 17473040

  • 1. A clinical evaluation of a self-etching primer and a giomer restorative material: results at eight years.
    Gordan VV, Mondragon E, Watson RE, Garvan C, Mjör IA.
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2007 May; 138(5):621-7. PubMed ID: 17473040
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. A clinical evaluation of a giomer restorative system containing surface prereacted glass ionomer filler: results from a 13-year recall examination.
    Gordan VV, Blaser PK, Watson RE, Mjör IA, McEdward DL, Sensi LG, Riley JL.
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2014 Oct; 145(10):1036-43. PubMed ID: 25270702
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Self-etching primer and resin-based restorative material: two-year clinical evaluation.
    Gordan VV, Mjör IA, Vazquez O, Watson RE, Wilson N.
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2002 Oct; 14(5):296-302. PubMed ID: 12405585
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Six-year clinical evaluation of packable composite restorations.
    Kiremitci A, Alpaslan T, Gurgan S.
    Oper Dent; 2009 Oct; 34(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 19192832
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Four-year clinical evaluation of a self-etching primer and resin-based restorative material.
    Gordan VV, Shen C, Watson RE, Mjor IA.
    Am J Dent; 2005 Feb; 18(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 15810481
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. A three-year clinical evaluation of two dentin bonding agents.
    Matis BA, Cochran MJ, Carlson TJ, Guba C, Eckert GJ.
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2004 Apr; 135(4):451-7. PubMed ID: 15127867
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Four-year clinical evaluation of posterior resin-based composite restorations placed using the total-etch technique.
    Baratieri LN, Ritter AV.
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2001 Apr; 13(1):50-7. PubMed ID: 11831309
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Three-year Clinical Performance of Two Giomer Restorative Materials in Restorations.
    Ozer F, Irmak O, Yakymiv O, Mohammed A, Pande R, Saleh N, Blatz M.
    Oper Dent; 2021 Jan 01; 46(1):E60-E67. PubMed ID: 33882138
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. An eighteen-month clinical evaluation of posterior restorations with fluoride releasing adhesive and composite systems.
    Akimoto N, Ohmori K, Hanabusa M, Momoi Y.
    Dent Mater J; 2011 Jan 01; 30(3):411-8. PubMed ID: 21597208
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Two-centre evaluation of a resin composite/ self-etching restorative system: three-year findings.
    Wilson NH, Gordan VV, Brunton PA, Wilson MA, Crisp RJ, Mjör IA.
    J Adhes Dent; 2006 Feb 01; 8(1):47-51. PubMed ID: 16536345
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: the 10-year report.
    Gaengler P, Hoyer I, Montag R.
    J Adhes Dent; 2001 Feb 01; 3(2):185-94. PubMed ID: 11570687
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Two-year clinical evaluation of ormocer and nanofill composite with and without a flowable liner.
    Efes BG, Dörter C, Gömeç Y, Koray F.
    J Adhes Dent; 2006 Apr 01; 8(2):119-26. PubMed ID: 16708724
    [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 01; 31(9):630-6. PubMed ID: 11203987
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Double-blind randomized clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 6-month follow-up.
    Coelho-de-Souza FH, Klein-Júnior CA, Camargo JC, Beskow T, Balestrin MD, Demarco FF.
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 Mar 01; 11(2):001-8. PubMed ID: 20228981
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Direct resin composite restorations versus indirect composite inlays: one-year results.
    Mendonça JS, Neto RG, Santiago SL, Lauris JR, Navarro MF, de Carvalho RM.
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 May 01; 11(3):025-32. PubMed ID: 20461321
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin-modified, glass-ionomer cement lining: a 1-year randomized, clinical trial.
    Banomyong D, Harnirattisai C, Burrow MF.
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 Feb 01; 2(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 25427330
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. One year clinical evaluation of two different types of composite resins in posterior teeth.
    Gianordoli Neto R, Santiago SL, Mendonça JS, Passos VF, Lauris JR, Navarro MF.
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 May 01; 9(4):26-33. PubMed ID: 18473024
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. A split-mouth randomized clinical trial of conventional and heavy flowable composites in class II restorations.
    Rocha Gomes Torres C, Rêgo HM, Perote LC, Santos LF, Kamozaki MB, Gutierrez NC, Di Nicoló R, Borges AB.
    J Dent; 2014 Jul 01; 42(7):793-9. PubMed ID: 24769385
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Two-year clinical performance of Clearfil SE and Clearfil S3 in restoration of unabraded non-carious class V lesions.
    Brackett MG, Dib A, Franco G, Estrada BE, Brackett WW.
    Oper Dent; 2010 Jul 01; 35(3):273-8. PubMed ID: 20533626
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. One-year retrospective clinical evaluation of hybrid composite restorations placed in United Kingdom general practices.
    Burke FJ, Crisp RJ, Bell TJ, Healy A, Mark B, McBirnie R, Osborne-Smith KL.
    Quintessence Int; 2001 Apr 01; 32(4):293-8. PubMed ID: 12066649
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 14.