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

235 related items for PubMed ID: 8746176

  • 1. The use of tensor analysis to investigate facial changes in treated class II division 1 malocclusions.
    Battagel JM.
    Eur J Orthod; 1996 Feb; 18(1):41-54. PubMed ID: 8746176
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Mandibular changes in persons with untreated and treated Class II division 1 malocclusion.
    Bishara SE.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1998 Jun; 113(6):661-73. PubMed ID: 9637570
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Comparison of 2 comprehensive Class II treatment protocols including the bonded Herbst and headgear appliances: a double-blind study of consecutively treated patients at puberty.
    Baccetti T, Franchi L, Stahl F.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jun; 135(6):698.e1-10; discussion 698-9. PubMed ID: 19524823
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Facial aesthetics following edgewise and Fränkel appliance therapy: the application of Chernoff faces.
    Battagel JM, Battagel NJ.
    Br J Orthod; 1994 May; 21(2):139-49. PubMed ID: 8043562
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Treating Class II malocclusion in children. Vertical skeletal effects of high-pull or low-pull headgear during comprehensive orthodontic treatment and retention.
    Antonarakis GS, Kiliaridis S.
    Orthod Craniofac Res; 2015 May; 18(2):86-95. PubMed ID: 25545335
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Control of the vertical dimension in Class II correction using a cervical headgear and lower utility arch in growing patients. Part I.
    Cook AH, Sellke TA, BeGole EA.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1994 Oct; 106(4):376-88. PubMed ID: 7942653
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Treatment effects of the edgewise Herbst appliance: a cephalometric and tomographic investigation.
    VanLaecken R, Martin CA, Dischinger T, Razmus T, Ngan P.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Nov; 130(5):582-93. PubMed ID: 17110255
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Vertical skeletal change associated with Andresen, Harvold, and Begg treatment.
    Ball JV, Hunt NP.
    Eur J Orthod; 1991 Feb; 13(1):47-52. PubMed ID: 2032567
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Comparison of treatment outcomes between skeletal anchorage and extraoral anchorage in adults with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion.
    Yao CC, Lai EH, Chang JZ, Chen I, Chen YJ.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Nov; 134(5):615-24. PubMed ID: 18984393
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Comparative efficiency of Class II malocclusion treatment with the pendulum appliance or two maxillary premolar extractions and edgewise appliances [corrected].
    Pinzan-Vercelino CR, Janson G, Pinzan A, de Almeida RR, de Freitas MR, de Freitas KM.
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Jun; 31(3):333-40. PubMed ID: 19395372
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Maxillary traction splint: a cephalometric evaluation.
    Caldwell SF, Hymas TA, Timm TA.
    Am J Orthod; 1984 May; 85(5):376-84. PubMed ID: 6586076
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Class III malocclusion: a comparison of extraction and non-extraction techniques.
    Battagel JM, Orton HS.
    Eur J Orthod; 1991 Jun; 13(3):212-22. PubMed ID: 1936140
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Effects of the pendulum appliance, cervical headgear, and 2 premolar extractions followed by fixed appliances in patients with Class II malocclusion.
    de Almeida-Pedrin RR, Henriques JF, de Almeida RR, de Almeida MR, McNamara JA.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Dec; 136(6):833-42. PubMed ID: 19962606
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. An evidence-based approach to treatment of open bite and deep bite: case reports.
    Hans MG, Teng CM, Liao CC, Chen YH, Yang CY.
    World J Orthod; 2007 Dec; 8(1):45-64. PubMed ID: 17373225
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Class II Division 1 Malocclusion Treated with a Cervical-Pull Headgear: A Case Report.
    Shah AH.
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2016 Dec; 27(1):25-8. PubMed ID: 27319037
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Profile changes in Class II, division 1 malocclusions: a comparison of the effects of Edgewise and Fränkel appliance therapy.
    Battagel JM.
    Eur J Orthod; 1989 Aug; 11(3):243-53. PubMed ID: 2792214
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Treatment effects produced by the twin-block appliance and the FR-2 appliance of Fränkel compared with an untreated Class II sample.
    Toth LR, McNamara JA.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1999 Dec; 116(6):597-609. PubMed ID: 10587592
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Long-term mandibular skeletal and dental effects of standard edgewise treatment.
    Bayirli B, Vaden JL, Johnston LE.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Nov; 144(5):682-90. PubMed ID: 24182584
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Stability of the lower labial segment following orthodontic treatment--a comparison of treatment with Andresen and Begg appliances.
    Sims AP, Springate SD.
    Br J Orthod; 1995 Feb; 22(1):13-21. PubMed ID: 7786861
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. The effect of treatment with the Bass appliance on skeletal Class II malocclusions: a cephalometric investigation.
    Cura N, Saraç M.
    Eur J Orthod; 1997 Dec; 19(6):691-702. PubMed ID: 9458602
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 12.