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
200 related items for PubMed ID: 29101414
1. Transversal changes, space closure, and efficiency of conventional and self-ligating appliances : A quantitative systematic review. Yang X, Xue C, He Y, Zhao M, Luo M, Wang P, Bai D. J Orofac Orthop; 2018 Jan; 79(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 29101414 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Effects of self-ligating brackets on oral hygiene and discomfort: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. Yang X, Su N, Shi Z, Xiang Z, He Y, Han X, Bai D. Int J Dent Hyg; 2017 Feb; 15(1):16-22. PubMed ID: 27095145 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Differences between active and passive self-ligating brackets for orthodontic treatment : Systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized clinical trials. Yang X, He Y, Chen T, Zhao M, Yan Y, Wang H, Bai D. J Orofac Orthop; 2017 Mar; 78(2):121-128. PubMed ID: 28224175 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparative assessment of alignment efficiency and space closure of active and passive self-ligating vs conventional appliances in adolescents: a single-center randomized controlled trial. Songra G, Clover M, Atack NE, Ewings P, Sherriff M, Sandy JR, Ireland AJ. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 May; 145(5):569-78. PubMed ID: 24785921 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Efficiency of self-ligating vs conventionally ligated brackets during initial alignment. Ong E, McCallum H, Griffin MP, Ho C. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Aug; 138(2):138.e1-7; discussion 138-9. PubMed ID: 20691348 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. [Are self-ligating brackets more efficient than conventional brackets ? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled and split-mouth trials]. Wagner D, Lévy-Benichou H, Lefebvre F, Bolender Y. Orthod Fr; 2020 Dec 01; 91(4):303-321. PubMed ID: 33355535 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Is there any difference between conventional, passive and active self-ligating brackets? A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Maizeray R, Wagner D, Lefebvre F, Lévy-Bénichou H, Bolender Y. Int Orthod; 2021 Dec 01; 19(4):523-538. PubMed ID: 34629309 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of anchorage loss between conventional and self-ligating brackets during canine retraction - A systematic review and meta-analysis. Malik DES, Fida M, Afzal E, Irfan S. Int Orthod; 2020 Mar 01; 18(1):41-53. PubMed ID: 31866192 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Root resorption during orthodontic treatment with self-ligating or conventional brackets: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Yi J, Li M, Li Y, Li X, Zhao Z. BMC Oral Health; 2016 Nov 21; 16(1):125. PubMed ID: 27871255 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Time efficiency of self-ligating vs conventional brackets in orthodontics: effect of appliances and ligating systems. Paduano S, Cioffi I, Iodice G, Rapuano A, Silva R. Prog Orthod; 2008 Nov 21; 9(2):74-80. PubMed ID: 19350061 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Self-ligating brackets in orthodontics. A systematic review. Fleming PS, Johal A. Angle Orthod; 2010 May 21; 80(3):575-84. PubMed ID: 20050755 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Systematic review of self-ligating brackets. Chen SS, Greenlee GM, Kim JE, Smith CL, Huang GJ. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Jun 21; 137(6):726.e1-726.e18; discussion 726-7. PubMed ID: 20685517 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of orthodontic space closure using micro-osteoperforation and passive self-ligating appliances or conventional fixed appliances. Mittal R, Attri S, Batra P, Sonar S, Sharma K, Raghavan S. Angle Orthod; 2020 Sep 01; 90(5):634-639. PubMed ID: 33378478 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Effects of fixed orthodontic brackets on oral malodor: A systematic review and meta-analysis according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. Huang J, Li CY, Jiang JH. Medicine (Baltimore); 2018 Apr 01; 97(14):e0233. PubMed ID: 29620635 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Factors influencing efficiency of sliding mechanics to close extraction space: a systematic review. Barlow M, Kula K. Orthod Craniofac Res; 2008 May 01; 11(2):65-73. PubMed ID: 18416747 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. A "typodont" study of rate of orthodontic space closure: self-ligating systems vs. conventional systems. Saporito I, Butti AC, Salvato A, Biagi R. Minerva Stomatol; 2011 May 01; 60(11-12):555-65. PubMed ID: 22210459 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Canine retraction and anchorage loss self-ligating versus conventional brackets: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Zhou Q, Ul Haq AA, Tian L, Chen X, Huang K, Zhou Y. BMC Oral Health; 2015 Nov 04; 15(1):136. PubMed ID: 26531223 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Therapeutic efficacy of self-ligating brackets: A systematic review. Dehbi H, Azaroual MF, Zaoui F, Halimi A, Benyahia H. Int Orthod; 2017 Sep 04; 15(3):297-311. PubMed ID: 28778722 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Leveling and alignment time and the periodontal status in patients with severe upper crowding treated by corticotomy-assisted self-ligating brackets in comparison with conventional or self-ligating brackets only: a 3-arm randomized controlled clinical trial. Al-Ibrahim HM, Hajeer MY, Alkhouri I, Zinah E. J World Fed Orthod; 2022 Feb 04; 11(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 34688577 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. No reliable evidence to guide initial arch wire choice for fixed appliance therapy. Flores-Mir C. Evid Based Dent; 2013 Dec 04; 14(4):114-5. PubMed ID: 24357824 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]