ArticleJournal of dental sciences2022
Relationship between craniofacial morphology and congenitally missing mandibular incisors.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of mandibular ramus asymmetry in patients with unilateral congenital tooth agenesis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Comprehensive insights and clinical pathways for managing congenitally missing mandibular incisors: A literature review.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Review
- State of the Art in the Treatment of Congenital Agenesis With Implant-Supported Prosthesis: A Comprehensive Multidisciplinary Management.Case reports in dentistry · 2024Article
- A Rare Incidence of Nonsyndromic Mandibular Incisor Agenesis in a Three-generation Family: Case Report and Literature Review.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/purpose: Treatment of incisors' agenesis is challenging that arouses orthodontists' interests. The purpose of this study was to compare the craniofacial pattern of individuals with or without congenitally missing mandibular incisors. Materials and methods: This retrospective study included patients receiving orthodontic consultation between 1999 and 2019 at the Orthodontic Division of the Dental Department of Taipei Medical University Hospital. Cephalometric measurements were obtained through manual tracing and by using computer software. A total of 31 measurements were obtained to evaluate skeletal, dental and soft tissues, and chin morphology. A multivariate analysis of covariance, analysis of covariance, and Scheffé's post hoc tests were used to analyze the differences among a group of patients with one congenitally missing mandibular incisor (M1), a group of patients with two congenitally missing mandibular incisors (M2), and the control group. Student's Results: Significant differences were observed between the M and control groups in terms of lower incisor angulation and facial balance. Regarding chin morphology, significant differences were noted between the M and control groups and also among the M1, M2, and control groups. Conclusion: The lower incisors of the M group are more retroclined than those of the control group, resulting in retrusive lower lips. Facial balance varies between the M and control groups. Congenitally missing mandibular incisors affect chin morphology, making the chin button prominent.
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.