SynthesisClinical oral investigations2023
Current landmarks for gingival thickness evaluation in maxillary anterior teeth: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of gingival phenotype: the role of gingival thickness measurements from different vertical gingival levels.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Trial
- Prevalence, Risk Indicators, and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Labial Gingival Recession Following Orthodontic Treatment: A Retrospective Study.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Article
- A novel fluoride tray-assisted workflow for artificial intelligence-driven automated maxillary gingival segmentation on cone beam CT.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2026Article
- Predictors of buccal bone thickness in the esthetic zone of patients with gummy smile: a cross-sectional study.Journal of periodontal & implant science · 2026Article
- A novel classification of periodontal phenotype integrating hard and soft tissue parameters using data-driven clustering.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Gingival phenotypes and dimensions of the soft periodontal tissues: a cross-sectional clinical and histological study.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Factors influencing fenestration and dehiscence in the anterior teeth after clear aligner treatment: a multicenter retrospective study.Progress in orthodontics · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of a novel non-invasive digital technique for assessing gingival phenotype: an area under the curve analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Gingival phenotype classification by visual and probe visibility assessments: Relationship with thickness and probe design.Journal of periodontology · 2025Article
- Morphology and thickness of the buccal bone wall of the maxillary central incisors in population: a CBCT study.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify and report the current landmarks used for measuring gingival thickness (GT) in healthy maxillary anterior teeth. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe protocol of this Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020-compliant systematic review was registered in PROSPERO. A literature search was conducted to identify articles that met the eligibility criteria published up to 2022. The methods of assessing gingival thickness and the landmarks adopted on the studies were described. Primary outcomes were identified, and the frequency of reporting in the selected articles was calculated. Additionally, risk-of-bias assessments were performed for individual articles.
resultsFifty-eight articles (34 with low risk of bias and 24 with medium risk of bias) were selected. A total of 3638 individuals had their gingival thickness measured. Thirty-nine different landmarks were adopted in the studies. Fifty-six articles with 22 landmarks were included in the meta-analysis. A higher heterogeneity was found between the studies (GT ranged from 0.48 to 2.59 mm, mean GT 1.074; 95% CI: 1.024-1.104). The 3 most used landmarks were 2 mm from gingival margin (10 studies, mean GT 1.170 mm, 95% CI: 1.085-1.254), bone crest (9 studies, mean GT 1.01 mm; 95% CI: 0.937-1.083), and cemento-enamel junction (7 studies, mean GT 1.172 mm; 95% CI: 1.105, 1.239).
conclusionsWithin the limits of this study, a large heterogeneity in GT was found, and there was no consensus on the ideal landmark for GT measurement. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The landmark 2 mm from gingival margin, located at attached gingiva, can be used for GT measurement by clinical and image-based devices. This is an important step for a quantitative instead of a qualitative evaluation of phenotypes.
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.