Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33289803›Full record

Trial reportThe Angle orthodontist2021

Factors influencing treatment efficiency.

Min-Ho Jung

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Angle orthodontist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. PerceptionRevista cientifica odontologica (Universidad Cientifica del Sur)
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Min-Ho Jung

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe purpose of this cohort study was to evaluate the effect of self-ligating brackets (SB) and other related factors that influence orthodontic treatment time. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was a two-armed prospective study. Consecutively treated patients who were recruited from a private practice were enrolled and asked to choose between SB and conventional brackets (CB). If the patient did not have a preference, that patient was randomly allocated. An identical archwire sequence was used, and all patients were treated by a single orthodontist. Treatment duration, number of bracket failures, poor oral hygiene, poor elastic wear, whether or not to orthodontic mini-implants (OMI) were used, OMI failure, extraction, American Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index, and arch length discrepancy were measured and statistically analyzed using t-tests, correlation analysis, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Stepwise regression analysis was conducted to generate an equation to predict treatment duration.

resultsA total of 134 patients with an average age of 22.73 years were included. The average treatment duration was 28.63 months. ANCOVA showed no significant difference in treatment duration between CB and SB. Stepwise regression analysis could explain 64.6% of the variance in treatment duration using five variables.

conclusionsSB did not exhibit a significant reduction in treatment time as compared with CB. Patient cooperation, extractions, and malocclusion severity had a significant impact on treatment duration.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsOrthodontic Anchorage ProceduresOrthodontic BracketsAdultCohort StudiesHumansOrthodontic Appliance DesignOrthodontic WiresProspective StudiesYoung AdultDental ImplantsExtractionPatient's cooperationSelf-ligating bracketsTreatment duration

Identifiers

PMID33289803
PMCPMC8032291

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.