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

396 related items for PubMed ID: 25976708

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Margin adaptation of indirect composite inlays fabricated on flexible dies.
    Price RB, Gerrow JD.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Mar; 83(3):306-13. PubMed ID: 10709039
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. A comparison of the accuracy of polyether, polyvinyl siloxane, and plaster impressions for long-span implant-supported prostheses.
    Hoods-Moonsammy VJ, Owen P, Howes DG.
    Int J Prosthodont; 2014 Mar; 27(5):433-8. PubMed ID: 25191885
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Effect of 3 medicaments on the dimensional accuracy and surface detail reproduction of polyvinyl siloxane impressions.
    O'Mahony A, Spencer P, Williams K, Corcoran J.
    Quintessence Int; 2000 Mar; 31(3):201-6. PubMed ID: 11203927
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Effect of different impression techniques on the dimensional accuracy of impressions using various elastomeric impression materials: an in vitro study.
    Singh K, Sahoo S, Prasad KD, Goel M, Singh A.
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2012 Jan 01; 13(1):98-106. PubMed ID: 22430701
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/light-body impression technique: an in vitro study.
    Caputi S, Varvara G.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Apr 01; 99(4):274-81. PubMed ID: 18395537
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of casts made by digital and conventional methods.
    Cho SH, Schaefer O, Thompson GA, Guentsch A.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Apr 01; 113(4):310-5. PubMed ID: 25682531
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Linear dimensional accuracy of a polyvinyl siloxane of varying viscosities using different impression techniques.
    Mishra S, Chowdhary R.
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2010 Aug 01; 1(1):37-46. PubMed ID: 25427185
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Effect of frequency and amplitude of vibration on void formation in dies poured from polyvinyl siloxane impressions.
    Abdullah MA.
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Oct 01; 80(4):490-4. PubMed ID: 9791799
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Accuracy of three implant impression techniques with different impression materials and stones.
    Chang WG, Vahidi F, Bae KH, Lim BS.
    Int J Prosthodont; 2012 Oct 01; 25(1):44-7. PubMed ID: 22259795
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Influence of tray rigidity and impression technique on accuracy of polyvinyl siloxane impressions.
    Hoyos A, Soderholm KJ.
    Int J Prosthodont; 2011 Oct 01; 24(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 21210004
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. 3D and 2D marginal fit of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions.
    Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Denry I, Thomas GW, Qian F.
    J Prosthodont; 2014 Dec 01; 23(8):610-7. PubMed ID: 24995593
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 20.