1 |
Baumrind S, Korn EL, West EE. Prediction of mandibular rotation: an empirical test of clinician performance. Am J Orthod 1984;86: 371-85
DOI
ScienceOn
|
2 |
Huggare J. The first cervical vertebra as an indicator of mandibular growth. Eur J Orthod 1989;11:10-6
DOI
PUBMED
|
3 |
Andresen V, Haupl K, Petrik L. Funktionskieferorthopadie: die 6, Munich, 1957 Johann Ambrosium Barth
|
4 |
Bjork A. The principle of the Andresen method of orthodontic treatment a discussion based on cephalometric X-ray analysis of treated cases. Am J Orthod 1951;37:437-58
DOI
ScienceOn
|
5 |
Cha BK, How to solve class II and III malocclusions. Seoul: Jeesung; 1997. p. 7-33
|
6 |
You ZH, Fishman LS, Rosenblum RE, Subtelny JD. Dentoalveolar changes related to mandibular fonvard growth in untreated Class II persons. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;120:598-607
DOI
ScienceOn
|
7 |
Pfeiffer JP, Grobety D. A philosophy of combined orthopedicorthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod 1982;81:185-201
DOI
ScienceOn
|
8 |
Bjork A. Prediction of mandibular growth rotation. Am J Orthod 1969;55;585-99
DOI
ScienceOn
|
9 |
Moss ML. The functional matrix hypothesis revisited. 2. The role of an osseous connected cellular network. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:221-6
DOI
ScienceOn
|
10 |
Vargervik K, Hawold EP. Response toactivator treatment in Class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod 1985;88:242-51
DOI
ScienceOn
|
11 |
Kylamarkula S, Huggare J. Head posture and the morphology of the first cervical vertebra. Eur J Orthod 1985;7: 151-6
DOI
PUBMED
ScienceOn
|
12 |
Birkebaek L, Melsen B, Terp S. A laminagraphic study of the alterations in the temporo-mandibular joint following activator treatment. Eur J Orthod 1984;6:257-66
DOI
PUBMED
|
13 |
Jacobson A, Evans W, Preston C, Sadowsky P. Mandibular prognathism, Am J Orthod 1974;66:140-71
DOI
ScienceOn
|
14 |
Forsberg CM, Odenrick L. Skeletal and soft tissue response to activator treatment. Eur J Orthod 1981;3:247-53
DOI
PUBMED
ScienceOn
|
15 |
Cha KS, Orthodontic Diagnosis. Seoul; International dental-medical; 1995. p. 102-3
|
16 |
Huggare J. Head posture and craniofacial morphology in adults from northern Finland. Proc Finn Dent Soc 1986;82:199-208
|
17 |
McNamara JA Jr. Components of Class I1 malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age. Angle Orthod 1981;51:177-202
PUBMED
|
18 |
Bjork A, Palling M. Adolescent age changes in sagittal jaw relation, alveolar prognathy, and incisal inclination. Acta Odontol Scand 1955;12:201-32
DOI
|
19 |
Moss ML. The functional matrix. In:Kraus B, Reidel R. editors. Vistas in orthodontics. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger. 1962;85-98
|
20 |
Balbach DR. The cephalometric relationship between the morphology of the mandible and its future occlusal position. Angle Orthod 1969;39:29-41
PUBMED
|
21 |
Bishara SE. Mandibular changes in persons with untreated and treated Class II division I malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113:661-73
DOI
ScienceOn
|
22 |
Pancherz H. A cephalometric analysis of skeletal and dental changes contributing to Class II correction in activator treatment. Am J Orthod 1984;85:125-34
DOI
ScienceOn
|
23 |
Moss ML. The functional matrix hypothesis revisited. 4. The epigenetic antithesis and the resolving synthesis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:410-7
DOI
ScienceOn
|
24 |
Treuenfels H. Head position, atlas position and breathing in open bite. Fortschr Kieferorthop. 1984;45:111-21
DOI
|
25 |
Moss ML. Rankow RM. The role of the functional matrix in mandibular growth. Angle Orthod 1968;38:95-103
PUBMED
|
26 |
Moss MI,. The functional matrix hypothesis revisited. 1. The role of mechanotransduction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112: 8-11
DOI
ScienceOn
|
27 |
Bjork A. Facial growth rotation-reflections on definition and cause. Proc Finn Dent Soc 1991;87:51-8
|
28 |
Moss ML. The functional matrix hypothesis revisited. 3. The genomic thesis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:338-42
|