ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2023
Determination of Palatal Soft Tissue Thickness and Safe Zone for Palatal Soft Tissue Harvest Using CBCT: A Retrospective Study.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 2023. 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.
- Assessment of Palatal Masticatory Mucosa Thickness in the Saudi Population of a Teaching Hospital in the Eastern Province: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional CBCT Study.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Evaluation of palatal mucosal thickness in maxillary posterior teeth using cone-beam computed tomography combined with intraoral scanning: a cross-sectional study on correlating factors.BMC oral health · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Our decision to conduct this study was motivated by the dearth of knowledge on geographical variations in the thickness of the palatal masticatory mucosa. The aim of the present study is to comprehensively analyze the palatal mucosal thickness and indicate the safety zone for palatal soft tissue harvesting using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Results: For sex and nationality, there was no significant association ( Conclusion: Palatal mucosal thickness varied significantly from the canine to the second molar; the most appropriate site for graft harvesting is the canine to second premolar area which is 9-12 mm from the midpalatal suture aspect and is considered a safe zone for harvesting palatal graft.
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.