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

167 related items for PubMed ID: 7546970

  • 1. The use of a reinforced glass-ionomer cermet for the restoration of primary molars: a clinical trial.
    Kilpatrick NM, Murray JJ, McCabe JF.
    Br Dent J; 1995 Sep 09; 179(5):175-9. PubMed ID: 7546970
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Glass ionomers in proximal cavities of primary molars.
    Forsten L, Karjalainen S.
    Scand J Dent Res; 1990 Feb 09; 98(1):70-3. PubMed ID: 2109348
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Glass ionomer-silver cermet Class II tunnel-restorations for primary molars.
    Croll TP.
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1988 Feb 09; 55(3):177-82. PubMed ID: 2968382
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Clinical behaviour of glass ionomer restorations in primary teeth.
    Espelid I, Tveit AB, Tornes KH, Alvheim H.
    J Dent; 1999 Aug 09; 27(6):437-42. PubMed ID: 10399410
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Microleakage of Class 2 glass-ionomer-silver restorations in primary molars.
    Fuks AB, Holan G, Simon H, Lewinstein I.
    Oper Dent; 1992 Aug 09; 17(2):62-9. PubMed ID: 1437689
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Clinical evaluation of glass ionomer-silver cermet restorations in primary molars: one year results.
    Hung TW, Richardson AS.
    J Can Dent Assoc; 1990 Mar 09; 56(3):239-40. PubMed ID: 2110027
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Longevity and cariostatic effects of everyday conventional glass-ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth: three-year results.
    Qvist V, Laurberg L, Poulsen A, Teglers PT.
    J Dent Res; 1997 Jul 09; 76(7):1387-96. PubMed ID: 9207772
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. A pilot study of the marginal adaptation and surface morphology of glass-cermet cements.
    Chu CH, King NM, Lee AM, Yiu CK, Wei SH.
    Quintessence Int; 1996 Jul 09; 27(7):493-501. PubMed ID: 8941827
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional cavity preparations for glass-ionomer restorations in primary molars: one-year results.
    Yip HK, Smales RJ, Yu C, Gao XJ, Deng DM.
    Quintessence Int; 2002 Jan 09; 33(1):17-21. PubMed ID: 11887531
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. A comparison of glass cermet cement and amalgam restorations in primary molars.
    Hickel R, Voss A.
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1990 Jan 09; 57(3):184-8. PubMed ID: 2111833
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Survival of glass ionomer restorations placed in primary molars using atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and conventional cavity preparations: 2-year results.
    Yu C, Gao XJ, Deng DM, Yip HK, Smales RJ.
    Int Dent J; 2004 Feb 09; 54(1):42-6. PubMed ID: 15005472
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Marginal leakage of Class II glass-ionomer-silver restorations, with and without posterior composite coverage: an in vitro study.
    Guelmann M, Fuks AB, Holan G, Grajower R.
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1989 Feb 09; 56(4):277-82. PubMed ID: 2503551
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Occlusal glass ionomer cermet, resin sandwich and amalgam restorations: a 2-year clinical study.
    Lidums A, Wilkie R, Smales R.
    Am J Dent; 1993 Aug 09; 6(4):185-8. PubMed ID: 7803005
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. In vitro comparative fluoride release, and weight and volume change in light-curing and self-curing glass ionomer materials.
    Wandera A, Spencer P, Bohaty B.
    Pediatr Dent; 1996 Aug 09; 18(3):210-4. PubMed ID: 8784911
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Randomized clinical trial of adhesive restorations in primary molars. 18-month results.
    Casagrande L, Dalpian DM, Ardenghi TM, Zanatta FB, Balbinot CE, García-Godoy F, De Araujo FB.
    Am J Dent; 2013 Dec 09; 26(6):351-5. PubMed ID: 24640441
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Lateral-access Class II restoration using resin-modified glass-ionomer or silver-cermet cement.
    Croll TP.
    Quintessence Int; 1995 Feb 09; 26(2):121-6. PubMed ID: 7568722
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Class II glass ionomer/silver cermet restorations and their effect on interproximal growth of mutans streptococci.
    Berg JH, Farrell JE, Brown LR.
    Pediatr Dent; 1990 Feb 09; 12(1):20-3. PubMed ID: 2119036
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Fluoride release from glass ionomer-lined amalgam restorations.
    Olsen BT, Garcia-Godoy F, Marshall TD, Barnwell GM.
    Am J Dent; 1989 Jun 09; 2(3):89-91. PubMed ID: 2513842
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Class II amalgam restorations, glass-ionomer tunnel restorations, and caries development on adjacent tooth surfaces: a 3-year clinical study.
    Svanberg M.
    Caries Res; 1992 Jun 09; 26(4):315-8. PubMed ID: 1423449
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. [Cermet cements for milk tooth fillings. Preliminary results].
    Hickel R, Petschelt A, Voss A.
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1989 Jun 09; 44(6):444-5. PubMed ID: 2517110
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 9.