Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33188284›Full record

SynthesisPediatric research2021

The prevalence of ankyloglossia in children aged <1 year: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Rebecca R Hill, Christopher S Lee, Britt F Pados

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Pediatric research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.6field-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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Beyond surgery: Pre- and post-operative care in children with ankyloglossia.International journal of paediatric dentistry · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rebecca R HillMGH Institute of Health Professions School of Nursing, 36 First Avenue, Boston, MA, 02129, USA. rhill@mghihp.edu.
Christopher S LeeBoston College William F. Connell School of Nursing, 140 Commonwealth Avenue, Chestnut Hill, MA, 02467, USA.
Britt F PadosBoston College William F. Connell School of Nursing, 140 Commonwealth Avenue, Chestnut Hill, MA, 02467, USA.
Boston College · USMGH Institute of Health Professions · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the low level of evidence supporting the correction of tongue-tie for breastfeeding problems, recognition and treatment has increased substantially over the past 15 years. Prevalence reporting of tongue-tie is variable. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively synthesize the prevalence of tongue-tie in children aged <1 year and to examine the psychometric properties of the assessment tools used for diagnosing tongue-tie in these studies.

methodsPRISMA and MOOSE guidelines were followed, with selection of studies and data extraction verified by two authors. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to determine an overall prevalence rate, prevalence by infant sex, and prevalence by diagnostic method.

resultsThere were 15 studies that met inclusion criteria. Overall prevalence of tongue-tie (N = 24,536) was 8% (95% CI 6-10%, p < 0.01). Prevalence was 7% in males and 4% in females. Prevalence was 10% when using a standardized assessment tool compared to 7% when using visual examination alone (p = 0.16). Available assessment tools for diagnosis of tongue-tie do not have adequate psychometric properties.

conclusionsTongue-tie is a common anomaly, which has the potential to impact infant feeding. Development of a psychometrically sound assessment of tongue-tie is needed. IMPACT: The overall prevalence of tongue-tie in infants aged <1 year is 8%. Available diagnostic tools for tongue-tie do not have adequate psychometric testing. Prevalence data can assist health care providers in the recognition of tongue-tie as a potential barrier to infant feeding to promote maternal breastfeeding success.

Indexed as

AnkyloglossiaBreast FeedingChecklistFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMalePhysical ExaminationPredictive Value of TestsPrevalencePsychometricsSeverity of Illness Index

Identifiers

PMID33188284
OpenAlexW3101064897

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.