Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33015719›Full record

SynthesisProgress in orthodontics2020

Duration of orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances in adolescents and adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Allen Abbing, Vasiliki Koretsi, Theodore Eliades, Spyridon N Papageorgiou

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Progress in orthodontics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05595174 (Assessment of Maxillary Canine Retraction Using Self-ligating Brackets System Assisted With Micro-osteoperforations), which is not on this map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

NCT05595174 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Assessment of Maxillary Canine Retraction Using Self-ligating Brackets System Assisted With Micro-osteoperforations: A Prospective Controlled Clinical Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorAl-Azhar UniversityRan2024 to 2024Enrolled16ConditionsAccerleration of Tooth MovementArmsself ligating bracket with micro osteoperforation, conventional bracket with micro osteoperforation, conventional bracket without micro osteoperforation, self ligating bracket without micro osteoperforation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Allen AbbingClinic of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse, 11, Zurich, Switzerland.
Vasiliki KoretsiClinic of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse, 11, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8416-6523
Theodore EliadesClinic of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse, 11, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2313-4979
Spyridon N PapageorgiouClinic of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse, 11, Zurich, Switzerland. snpapage@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1968-3326
University of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesAdults with fixed orthodontic appliances are increasing nowadays. Compared with adolescents, adults present biological differences that might influence treatment duration. Therefore, the aim of the study was to compare duration of treatment with fixed appliances between adults and adolescents. MATERIALS AND

methodsEight databases were searched up to September 2019 for randomized and non-randomized clinical studies comparing treatment duration with fixed appliances in adolescents and adult patients. After duplicate study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment with the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool, random effects meta-analyses of mean differences (MD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed, followed by assessment of the quality of evidence with GRADE.

resultsA total of 11 unique studies (one prospective and 10 retrospective non-randomized) with 2969 adolescents and 1380 adult patients were finally included. Meta-analysis of 7 studies found no significant difference in the duration of comprehensive treatment with fixed appliances (MD = - 0.8 month; 95% CI = - 4.2 to 2.6 months; P = 0.65; I

conclusionsWhile existing evidence does not indicate a difference in the overall duration of treatment with fixed appliances between adults and adolescents, the alignment of palatally displaced canines lasted significantly longer in adults. However, our confidence in these estimates is low due to the risk of bias in the included studies.

trial registrationPROSPERO: ( CRD42019148169 ).

Indexed as

MolarOrthodontic Appliances, FixedAdolescentAdultDuration of TherapyHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesClinical trialsFixed appliancesMeta-analysisOrthodonticsSystematic reviewTreatment duration

Identifiers

PMID33015719
PMCPMC7533275
OpenAlexW3089558298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.