Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25512739›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2014

Clinical findings and long-term managements of patients with amelogenesis imperfecta.

Mine Koruyucu, Merve Bayram, Elif Bahar Tuna, Koray Gencay, Figen Seymen

Open access · hybridAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of dentistry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The burden of dental care in Amelogenesis Imperfecta paediatric patients in the UK NHS: a retrospective, multi-centred analysis.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mine KoruyucuDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkiye.
Merve BayramDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkiye.
Elif Bahar TunaDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkiye.
Koray GencayDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkiye.
Figen SeymenDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkiye.
Istanbul University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this clinical case series is to present a diagnosis and different treatment methods of patients in different ages with amelogenesis imperfecta (AI) as well as further treatments during a 3-6 years follow-up period. A number of 31 patients (16 female, 15 male with a mean age of 10.77 ± 2.65 years) with AI have been examined for the study group between 2007 and 2010 years. A detailed anamnesis was recorded, followed by a clinical and radiological assessment of oral health. The types of AI classified for each patient according to clinical and radiographic evaluation. The main complaints of patients, presence of dental caries and dental anomalies were noted. Necessary treatments had been planned for the individual cases of AI. A number of 19 patients had hypoplastic (HP) form, and 10 patients showed hypomaturation (HM) form of AI, while one patient showed hypocalcified form of AI and one patient had HM-HP form with taurodontism. Main complaints were chiefly related to dissatisfactory esthetics and dental sensitivity. Caries prevalence index was 93.5%. Mean decayed, missing, filling permanent teeth (DMF) and DMF surface (DMFS) were found as 2.74 ± 1.71 and 6.23 ± 3.99; df (decayed, filling primary teeth) and dfs (decayed, filling primary teeth surface) were found as 3.12 ± 2.85 and 5.24 ± 4.97, respectively. All patients received individual clinical care, including preventive, restorative, and prosthetic treatments. Patients have scheduled for regular follow-up in every 3 months. Composite restorations were used as the most common treatment (25 patients, 80.6%). The treatment plan should be based on patient's age, type of defects and individual needs of the patients. Necessary treatment plan is essential, not only due to functional and aesthetic reasons, but also for the positive psychological impact on young patients.

Indexed as

Amelogenesis imperfectamanagementtreatment

Identifiers

PMID25512739
PMCPMC4253114
OpenAlexW2078601067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.