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
117 related items for PubMed ID: 2275836
1. The clinical wear of three posterior composites. Mair LH, Vowles RW, Cunningham J, Williams DF. Br Dent J; ; 169(11):355-60. PubMed ID: 2275836 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Wear patterns in two amalgams and three posterior composites after 5 years' clinical service. Mair LH. J Dent; 1995 Apr; 23(2):107-12. PubMed ID: 7738266 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Ten-year clinical assessment of three posterior resin composites and two amalgams. Mair LH. Quintessence Int; 1998 Aug; 29(8):483-90. PubMed ID: 9807127 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical performance of posterior composite resin restorations. Johnson GH, Bales DJ, Gordon GE, Powell LV. Quintessence Int; 1992 Oct; 23(10):705-11. PubMed ID: 1289954 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. [An in vitro study of wear and marginal fracture of posterior composite resins]. Futatsuki M, Nakata M. Shoni Shikagaku Zasshi; 1990 Oct; 28(4):937-48. PubMed ID: 2134129 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Two-body in vitro wear study of some current dental composites and amalgams. Hu X, Marquis PM, Shortall AC. J Prosthet Dent; 1999 Aug; 82(2):214-20. PubMed ID: 10424987 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. In vivo evaluation of the surface of posterior resin composite restorations: a pilot study. Pesun IJ, Olson AK, Hodges JS, Anderson GC. J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Sep; 84(3):353-9. PubMed ID: 11005910 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. [Black or white--Which choice for the molars? Part 2. Which does one choose for the restoration of posterior teeth: amalgam or composite?]. De Moor R, Delmé K. Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2008 Sep; 63(4):135-46. PubMed ID: 19227687 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. A randomized controlled 27 years follow up of three resin composites in Class II restorations. Pallesen U, van Dijken JW. J Dent; 2015 Dec; 43(12):1547-58. PubMed ID: 26363442 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Three-year follow-up of five posterior composites: in vivo wear. Willems G, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vanherle G. J Dent; 1993 Apr; 21(2):74-8. PubMed ID: 8473595 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of composite wear with a new multi-mode oral wear simulator. Condon JR, Ferracane JL. Dent Mater; 1996 Jul; 12(4):218-26. PubMed ID: 9002838 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. In vivo occlusal wear of posterior composite restorations. Lewis G. Oper Dent; 1991 Jul; 16(2):61-9. PubMed ID: 1803330 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of particle variation on wear rates of posterior composites. Suzuki S, Leinfelder KF, Kawai K, Tsuchitani Y. Am J Dent; 1995 Aug; 8(4):173-8. PubMed ID: 7576382 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. [Composites versus amalgam: comparative measurements of abrasion resistance in vivo: 1-year results]. Meier C, Lutz F. SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd; 1979 Mar; 89(3):203-12. PubMed ID: 293032 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The management of occlusal caries in permanent molars. A 5-year clinical trial comparing a minimal composite with an amalgam restoration. Welbury RR, Walls AW, Murray JJ, McCabe JF. Br Dent J; 1979 Mar; 169(11):361-6. PubMed ID: 2275837 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. In vitro quantitative assessment of generalized wear of dental composites. Kawai K, Tsuchitani Y. J Osaka Univ Dent Sch; 1994 Dec; 34():9-18. PubMed ID: 8935089 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]