ArticleBMC oral health2019
The influence of bracket type on the external apical root resorption in class I extraction patients - a retrospective study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Orthodontic Treatment and External Apical Root Resorption: A Study on the Worldwide Prevalence - A Scoping Review.Turkish journal of orthodontics · 2026Article
- External Apical Root Resorption in Vital and Endodontically Treated Teeth Following Fixed Orthodontic Treatment: A Retrospective Longitudinal Panoramic Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- External apical root resorption assessment revisited: a scoping review.The Angle orthodontist · 2025Article
- Apical Root Resorption of Endodontically Treated Teeth after Orthodontic Treatment: A Split-mouth Study.Turkish journal of orthodontics · 2023Article
- The influence of bracket torque on external apical root resorption in bimaxillary protrusion patients: a retrospective study.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- Concentration of dentin sialoprotein at the initial stage of orthodontic treatment using self-ligating and conventional preadjusted brackets: A pilot study.Journal of orthodontic science · 2022Article
- GWAS of Post-Orthodontic Aggressive External Apical Root Resorption Identified Multiple Putative Loci at X-Y Chromosomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe relationship between orthodontic treatment-related factors and EARR has never been fully answered. The aim of this study was to investigate whether conventional and passive self-ligating brackets affect the amount and severity of external apical root resorption (EARR) in withdrawal patients.
methodsNinety-eight patients were selected from department of orthodontic, hospital of stamotology, Wenzhou medical university. Patients received treatment with either a conventional edgewise appliance (n = 49, Mini, 3 M Unitek, USA) or a passive self-ligating bracket system (n = 49, Damon, Ormco, USA). EARR of the maxillary incisors was evaluated on panoramic radiographs at the before and end of orthodontic treatment, respectively. Intergroup comparisons of root resorption were performed with Mann-Whitney tests. The univariate and multivariate regression model was used to assess the appliance type, age, sex and duration of treatment on EARR.
resultsThere was no significant difference in the amount of EARR between the two groups was found. Age and gender were not association with EARR, however, EARR was positively correlated with treatment duration.
conclusionsThe type of bracket did not influence the occurrence and severity of the external apical root resorption in class I extraction patients.
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.