ArticleJournal of orthodontic science2020
A retrospective comparison of dental and skeletal ages between African American, Caucasian, and Hispanic subjects.
Article in Journal of orthodontic science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of cervical vertebral maturation, hand wrist skeletal maturity indicators, and dental age in growing patients: A retrospective study.Journal of orthodontic science · 2026Article
- Correlation Between Dental Age, Chronological Age, and Cervical Vertebral Maturation in Patients with Class II Malocclusion: A Retrospective Study in a Romanian Population Group.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare dental and skeletal ages among African American (AA), Caucasian (C) and Hispanic (H) subjects (chronological ages 9 to 15-years). MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 168 subjects (9 to 15 years old) were equally divided into AA, C, and H groups, with an equal number of males and females. Each group was divided equally into 7 chronological age-groups, ranging from 9 to 15 years. Dental age was determined from panoramic radiographs as primary, early mixed, late mixed, or permanent dentition (scored as 1-4). Skeletal age was calculated from hand-wrist radiographs using Fishman's Skeletal Maturation Index (SMI 1-11). One-way analysis of variance and Tukey's test were used to compare skeletal and dental ages among AA, C and H subjects; and AA, C and H subjects in each chronological age-group. The two-sample t-test was used to compare SMI and dental age among females and males.
resultsSkeletal and dental age were not significantly different between AA, C and H subjects. Mean SMI was higher in females than males; and there were no significant gender differences regarding dental age. Mean SMI and dental age were significantly different among AA, C and H subjects in the 12-year-old and 11-year-old age groups, respectively.
conclusionsDental and skeletal maturation are fairly similar among AA, C and H subjects (aged 9 to 15 years).
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.