ArticleJournal of oral & maxillofacial research
The Reliability and Influence of Body Position on Acoustic Pharyngometry and Rhinometry Outcomes.
Article in Journal of oral & maxillofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04964830 (Sleep, Upper Airway and Dental Occlusion in Children With Large Overjet Before and After Treatment With a Mandibular Advancement Device), which is not on this 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.
Sleep, Upper Airway and Dental Occlusion in Children With Large Overjet Before and After Treatment With a Mandibular Advancement Device (MAD)
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reliability of Acoustic Pharyngometry and Rhinometry Examination in Children and Adolescents.Journal of oral & maxillofacial researchArticle
- Risk of Narrow Upper Airway in Class II Children with Large Horizontal Maxillary Overjet Assessed By Acoustic Reflection: a Case-Control Study.Journal of oral & maxillofacial researchArticle
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this cross sectional study was to analyze the method error and reliability in acoustic pharyngometry and rhinometry and to analyze the difference between standing and sitting position in acoustic pharyngometry and rhinometry. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe sample comprised 38 healthy subjects (11 men and 27 women) as part of a control group in another study. The subjects underwent repeated measures of acoustic pharyngometry and rhinometry in standing and sitting position. Upper airway dimensions in terms of volume, minimum cross-sectional areas (MCA) and distances were evaluated using the Eccovision
resultsThere was no systematic error in the repeated measures except for the distance to MCA in the left nostril in sitting position (P = 0.041). The method error for the pharyngometry ranged between 0.001 to 0.164 cm/cm
conclusionsThe results indicate that acoustic pharyngometry and rhinometry are reliable methods to perform repeated measures of the upper airway dimensions especially in the standing mirror position. It may be essential to perform the measures with the patient positioned in the same body position each time.
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.