ArticleHua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology2017
[Comprehensive assessment of atypical-extraction orthodontic treatment].
Article in Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology, 2017. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Changes in glenoid fossa of adult female patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion during premolar extraction treatment and mini-implant anchorage: a cone-beam computed tomography study.The Angle orthodontist · 2025Article
- [Expert consensus on standardized clinical applications of minimally invasive tooth extraction techniques].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo discuss through retrospective study associated factors influencing orthodontists to develop orthodontic treatment plans and to calculate constituent ratio of a typical extraction in orthodontic treatment.
methodsSystematic sampling was performed among 7 344 orthodontic patients, who received orthodontic treatment from April 2012 to March 2014 in the Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University. The study included statistical data on factors that may influence development of treatment plans. Samples were used to calculate extraction-ratio and atypical-extraction-ratio. Research focused on associated factors influencing development of treatment plans while evaluating correlation significances of each factor. Finally, treatment outcomes of atypical-extraction were compared with those of typical-extraction.
resultsAmong studied patients, 55.31% (406/734) received orthodontic extraction treatment. In orthodontic-extraction-treated patients, typical-extraction accounted for 59.11% (240/406), orthodontists-selected atypical-extraction accounted for 23.15% (94/406), and passive atypical-extraction accounted for 17.73% (72/406). With statistical analysis, we inferred associated factors influencing development of treatment plans as follows: sex and age of patients, sex of orthodontists, accurate condition of specific teeth, Angle's classification, and degree of midline deviation. Tooth loss before treatment also directly influences passive atypical-extraction. Statistically significant factors were not obtained. Significant difference of treatment outcome was not observed between atypical-extraction and typical-extraction-orthodontic treatment (P>0.05).
conclusionsAbove mentioned factors may influence orthodontists to develop treatment plans. However, orthodontists should also consider expected results of treatment strategies to prepare individual treatment plans on the basis of comprehensive analysis. .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.