Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28525530›Full record

ReviewBone reports2015

Micro-CT analysis of the rodent jaw bone micro-architecture: A systematic review.

F Faot, M Chatterjee, G V de Camargos, Joke Duyck, K Vandamme

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bone reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Standardized assessment of bone micromorphometry around teeth following orthodontic tooth movement : A µCT split-mouth study in mice.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Micro-CT-Based Bone Microarchitecture Analysis of the Murine Skull.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

F FaotKU Leuven, University Hospitals Leuven, Department of Oral Health Sciences & Dental Clinic, BIOMAT KU Leuven & Prosthetics, Belgium.
M ChatterjeeKU Leuven, University Hospitals Leuven, Department of Oral Health Sciences & Dental Clinic, BIOMAT KU Leuven & Prosthetics, Belgium.
G V de CamargosKU Leuven, University Hospitals Leuven, Department of Oral Health Sciences & Dental Clinic, BIOMAT KU Leuven & Prosthetics, Belgium.
Joke DuyckKU Leuven, University Hospitals Leuven, Department of Oral Health Sciences & Dental Clinic, BIOMAT KU Leuven & Prosthetics, Belgium.
K VandammeKU Leuven, University Hospitals Leuven, Department of Oral Health Sciences & Dental Clinic, BIOMAT KU Leuven & Prosthetics, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BEUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionKnowledge about macro- and micro-structural characteristics may improve METHODOLOGY: A detailed search through the PubMed database was performed. Articles published up to December 2013 and related to maxilla, mandible and condyle with quantitatively analysed bone micro-architectural parameters were considered eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers assessed the search results according to inclusion criteria designed to identify animal studies quantifying the bone micro-architecture of the jaw rodent bones in physiological or drug-induced disease status, or in response to interventions such as mechanical loading, hormonal treatment and other metabolic alterations. Finally, the reporting quality of the included publications was evaluated using the tailored ARRIVE guidelines outlined by Vignoletti and Abrahamsson (2012).

resultsDatabase search, additional manual searching and assessment of the inclusion and exclusion criteria retrieved 127 potentially relevant articles. Eventually, 14 maxilla, 20 mandible and 12 condyle articles with focus on bone healing were retained, and were analysed together with 3 methodological papers. Each study was described systematically in terms of subject, experimental intervention, follow-up period, selected region of interest used in the micro-CT analysis, parameters quantified, micro-CT scanner device and software. The evidence level evaluated by the ARRIVE guidelines showed high mean scores (between 18 and 25; range: 0-25), indicating that most of the selected studies are well-reported. The major obstacles identified were related to sample size calculation, absence of adverse event descriptions, randomization or blinding procedures.

conclusionsThe evaluated studies are highly heterogeneous in terms of research topic and the different regions of interest. These results illustrate the need for a standardized methodology in micro-CT analysis. While the analysed studies do well according to the ARRIVE guidelines, the micro-CT procedure is often insufficiently described. Therefore we recommend to extend the ARRIVE guidelines for micro-CT studies.

Indexed as

Bone micro-architectureCondyleMandibleMaxillaMicro-CTRodent jaws

Identifiers

PMID28525530
PMCPMC5365162
OpenAlexW1986531926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.