Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26980200›Full record

SynthesisProgress in orthodontics2016

Effect of molar intrusion with temporary anchorage devices in patients with anterior open bite: a systematic review.

Ahmad Saleem Alsafadi, Mohannad M Alabdullah, Humam Saltaji, Anas Abdo, Mohamed Youssef

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Progress in orthodontics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Retention: taking a more active role.British dental journal · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network Adult Anterior Open Bite Study: Treatment success.American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2020
    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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ahmad Saleem AlsafadiDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Damascus University, Damascus, Syria. alsafadisaleem10@gmail.com.
Mohannad M AlabdullahDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Damascus University, Damascus, Syria.
Humam SaltajiOrthodontic Graduate Clinic, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8978-458X
Anas AbdoFaculty of Dentistry, Damascus University, Damascus, Syria.
Mohamed YoussefDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Damascus University, Damascus, Syria.
Damascus University · SYUniversity of Alberta · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of the study is to assess the effect of molar intrusion with temporary anchorage devices on the vertical facial morphology and mandibular rotation during open bite treatment in the permanent dentition.

methodsWe performed a systematic review of the published data in seven electronic databases up to September 2015. We considered studies for inclusion if they were examining the effects of posterior teeth intrusion on the vertical facial morphology with open bite malocclusion in the permanent dentition. Study selection, risk of bias assessment, and data-extraction were performed in duplicate. Meta-analysis was not possible due to dissimilarity and heterogeneity among the included studies.

resultsOut of the 42 articles that met the initial eligibility criteria, 12 studies were finally selected. Low level of scientific evidence was identified after risk of bias assessment of the included studies with no relevant randomized controlled trial performed. Out of the 12 selected studies, five studies used miniplates and seven studies used miniscrews. Mandibular counterclockwise rotation was found to be between 2.3° and 3.9° in six studies (as sassed by mandibular plane angle, between MeGo or GoGn and SN or FH plane) while it was less than 2° in the remaining studies.

conclusionsCurrent weak evidence suggests that molar intrusion with temporary anchorage devices may cause mandibular counterclockwise autorotation. Future well-conducted and clearly reported multicenter randomized controlled trials that include a non-treatment control group are needed to make robust recommendations regarding the amount of mandibular rotation during open bite treatments.

Indexed as

MolarOpen BiteCephalometryHumansMandibleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTooth Movement TechniquesMolar intrusionSkeletal open biteSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID26980200
PMCPMC4803715
OpenAlexW2307062703

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.