ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Progressive Comparison of Density Assessment of Alveolar Bone Graft in Patients with Unilateral and Bilateral Cleft.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: Continuing to observe the grafted bone mineral density (BMD) is essential to ensure the success of alveolar bone grafting (ABG) in patients with cleft lip and palate. This study elaborates on three methods that can be used to evaluate the progressive BMD. (2) Methods: Forty patients with unilateral or bilateral clefts receiving ABG were enrolled. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were taken at 6 months (T1) and 2 years (T2) postoperatively. In CBCT, measurements were obtained on three different planes using the circle located 1 mm from the adjacent teeth (Method A), the largest circle within the defect (Method B), or the central circle with a diameter of 2 mm (Method C). The BMD was the average density of the three planes and was adjusted by pogonion density. Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate the agreement of each method. Inter-rater reliability was confirmed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). (3) Results: For Method A, B, and C, the mean-adjusted BMD (BMD/pogonion density, BMD
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.