ReviewOrthodontics & craniofacial research2019
Development of a clinical practice guideline for orthodontic retention.
Review in Orthodontics & craniofacial research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of different orthodontic retainers on dental arch stability and periodontal health: a systematic review with pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Pooled it
- A randomized controlled trial comparing retainers in bimaxillary proclination cases.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Trial
- Stability, survival, and patient satisfaction with CAD/CAM versus conventional multistranded fixed retainers in orthodontic patients: a 6-month follow-up of a two-centre randomized controlled clinical trial.European journal of orthodontics · 2023Trial
- Beyond Sagittal and Vertical: Transverse Constriction as a Feature of the Collapsed Arch in Angle Class II Post-Extraction Retreatment Patients: A Retrospective CBCT Pilot Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Cross-Sectional Survey of Orthodontic Retention Practices and Opinions Among General Dental Practitioners in Australia.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Article
- [Orthodontic treatment strategies and considerations in adult patients with periodontal disease].Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2026Review
- Effect of different fixed lingual retainers on tooth mobility: prospective clinical study.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2025Observational
- Low translational and rotational movements with 2-point stainless-steel retainers over a period of 1 and 3 years.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2025Article
- Alveolar ridge height changes in adults and adolescents with angle class I malocclusion before and after orthodontic treatment.African health sciences · 2025Article
- Dutch dentists' involvement in orthodontic retention: monitoring, opinions, competence and communication gaps.European journal of orthodontics · 2025Article
- Expert consensus on orthodontic treatment of patients with periodontal disease.International journal of oral science · 2025Review
- Orthodontic treatment and its impact on psychological and social health: A review of the literature.Journal of orthodontic science · 2025Article
- A Cross-Sectional Evaluation of the Association between Orthodontic Treatment, Retention Modality and the Prevalence of Gingival Recession.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the use of a clinical practice guideline for external apical root resorption among orthodontists.Progress in orthodontics · 2024Article
- Retention Force Comparison between Hawley and Vacuum-Formed Retainers in Orthodontic Treatment of Maxillary Arch: A Prospective, Non-randomized, Cohort Study over 6 Months : Comparing Retention Force of Hawley and Vacuum Formed Retainers.Galen medical journal · 2024Article
- Striving for Perfection: How Stable Is Orthodontic Treatment When Excellent Outcomes Are Achieved? A 9-Year Post-Treatment Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of digital construction, production and intraoral position accuracy of novel 3D CAD/CAM titanium retainers.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2023Article
- Orthodontic retention experience of university students: A qualitative study.Journal of orthodontics · 2023Article
- A survey of patient compliance with removable orthodontic retainer wear in Brunei Darussalam.BDJ open · 2023Article
- Orthodontic Retainers-A Critical Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for orthodontic retention (OR). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe CPG was developed according to the AGREE II instrument and EBRO (Dutch methodology for evidence-based guideline development). Reporting was done according the RIGHT statement. A Task Force developed clinical questions regarding OR. To answer these questions, a systematic literature search in PubMed and EMBASE was performed. Two independent researchers identified and selected studies, assessed risk of bias using Cochrane RoB tool and rated quality of evidence using GRADE. The Task Force formulated considerations and recommendations after discussing the evidence. The concept CPG was sent for commentary to all relevant stakeholders.
resultOne systematic review-with 15 studies-met the inclusion criteria. In case of low evidence and lack of outcome measures, expert-based considerations were developed. Over four meetings, the Task Force reached consensus on considerations and recommendations, after which the concept CPG was ready for the commentary phase. After processing the comments, the CPG was presented to the Dutch Association of Orthodontists, whereafter authorization followed. LIMITATIONS: The paucity of evidence-based studies concerning OR and the reporting of measurable patient outcomes.
conclusionThis CPG offers practitioner recommendations for best practice regarding OR, may reduce variation between practices and assists with patient aftercare. A carefully chosen retention procedure for individual patients, combined with clear information and communication between orthodontist, dentist and patient will contribute to long-term maintenance of orthodontic treatment results.
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.