ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2016
An orthodontic patient expects?
Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parental influence in orthodontic treatment: a systematic review.Medicine and pharmacy reports · 2023Review
- Unusual Case of Extraction of Maxillary Lateral Incisors and Mandibular Central Incisors.Case reports in dentistry · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data sourcesPubmed, Cochrane, Web of Science and PsychINFO databases.Study selectionExperimental studies (randomised or not, prospective, retrospective and cross sectional) with qualitative and/or quantitative analysis investigating patients' expectations of orthodontic treatment were considered. Only English language studies were included.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers screened the studies with a single reviewer abstracting the data. Study quality was assessed by two reviewers using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) criteria. Because of heterogeneity of the study designs a narrative summary was presented.ResultsFourteen papers reporting 13 studies were included. There was one RCT, one cohort study, two questionnaire-developments and ten cross-sectional studies. Seven studies summarising expectations with regards to the treatment process, experience and impact on quality of life, and six studies summarising expectations with regards to the treatment outcome and benefits were discussed.ConclusionsOrthodontics appears to have adopted various standardised questionnaires. However, most of them are poor in the quality of methodology and results analysis, which prohibits synthesising sufficient evidence to help identify which factors influence patient expectations. The evidence of 'expectations' affecting treatment outcomes is not found in current research. Future studies are needed to better understand the impact of 'expectation' on the treatment both theoretically and experimentally.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27980335What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.