ArticleJournal of anatomy2020
The ontogeny of maximum bite force in humans.
Article in Journal of anatomy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Static and fatigue behavior of one- and two-piece zirconia implant abutment systems: an in vitro study.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Sex-Related Differences in Maximum Bite Force, Occlusal Contact Area and Bite Pressure in Healthy Young Asian Adults.Journal of oral rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Oral Motion-Powered Smart Dental Implant Abutment for In Situ Antibacterial and Cell Adhesion Through Piezoelectric Effect.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- How Food Geometry and Toughness Influence Ingestive Patterns in Lemurs.American journal of primatology · 2026Article
- Fracture Resistance of Extensively Compromised Anterior Teeth Restored With Fiberglass Posts and Biomimetic Protocols: An In Vitro Study.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Article
- Comparative effects of two luting cements and different cement volumes on the post-cementation occlusal elevation and fit of zirconia crowns.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Predictive bite force modelling of head and neck oncology patients for clinical mandibular reconstruction applications.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Targeting the Oral Mucosa: Emerging Drug Delivery Platforms and the Therapeutic Potential of Glycosaminoglycans.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Bite force production and the origin ofRoyal Society open science · 2025Article
- Article
- The Fracture Resistance Comparison between Titanium and Zirconia Implant Abutments with and without Ageing: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Dentistry journal · 2024Review
- Edible Bite Force Sensor: A Novel Approach to Measuring Bite Force in Biomedical and Dental Applications.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
- Bite Force Mapping Based on Distributed Fiber Sensing Network Approach.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Biomechanical behavior of implants with different diameters in relation to simulated bone loss- an in vitro study.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
- In vitro fatigue and fracture testing of temporary materials from different manufacturing processes in implant-supported anterior crowns.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
- Article
- Barbed Dental Ti6Al4V Alloy Screw: Design and Bench Testing.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Fracture Load as a Function of the Material Thickness: The Key to Computing the Strength of Monolithic All-Ceramic Materials?Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Dental wear and oral pathology among sex determined Early Bronze-Age children from Franzhausen I, Lower Austria.PloS one · 2023Article
- Wear Behaviour of Polymer-Infiltrated Network Ceramics, Lithium Disilicate and Cubic Zirconia against Enamel in a Bruxism-Simulated Scenario.Biomedicines · 2022Article
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
Ontogenetic changes in the human masticatory complex suggest that bite force, a key measure of chewing performance, increases throughout growth and development. Current published bite force values for humans exist for molar and incisal biting, but few studies measure bite forces across all tooth types, or measure bite force potentials in subjects of different ages. In the absence of live data, models of bite force such as the Constrained Lever Model (CLM), are employed to predict bite force at different bite points for adults, but it is unclear whether such a model can accurately predict bite force potentials for juveniles or subadults. This study compares theoretically derived bite forces and live bite force data, and places these within an ontogenetic context in humans. Specifically, we test whether (1) patterns of maximum bite force increase along the tooth row throughout ontogeny, (2) bite force patterns estimated using the CLM match patterns observed from live bite force data, and (3) changes in bite forces along the tooth row and throughout ontogeny are associated with concomitant changes in adductor muscle leverage. Our findings show that maximum bite forces increase throughout ontogeny and change along the tooth row, with the highest forces occurring at the posterior dentition. These findings adhere to the expectations under the CLM and validate the model's utility in predicting bite force values throughout development. Furthermore, adductor muscle leverage values reflect this pattern, with the greatest leverage values occurring at the posterior dentition throughout ontogeny. The CLM informs our study of mammalian chewing mechanics by providing a model of how morphological changes of the masticatory apparatus during ontogeny affect bite force distribution along the tooth row. Furthermore, the decreased bite force magnitudes observed in juveniles and subadults compared with adults suggest that differences in juvenile and subadult diets may partially be due to differences in bite force production potentials.
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.