ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Comparative Evaluation of Condylar Guidance Angles Measured Using Arcon and Non-Arcon Articulators and Panoramic Radiographs-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Comparative analysis of transformer, CNN, and YOLO architectures for mandibular condyle segmentation on panoramic radiographs: a deep learning benchmark.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Controlled Mandibular Repositioning: A Novel Approach for Treatment of TMDs.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The condylar guidance value (CGV) measurement constitutes an important part of a holistic prosthodontic treatment plan, with horizontal CGVs (HCGVs) and lateral CGVs (LCGVs) being two of the most prominently recognized. This systematic review aimed at evaluating the efficacy of two different types of CGV measurement protocols-articulators (both arcon and non-arcon) and panoramic radiographs. Additionally, it attempts to determine which of the mentioned methods performs better across several parameters. Several important web databases were searched using search terms derived from medical subject headings (MeSH), using keywords linked to "Arcon articulator", "Condylar guidance angle", "non-arcon articulator", "Panoramic x-ray" and "Radiographic examination", which constituted the first step in the study selection strategy. After completion, the search strategy which initially turned up to 831 papers, eventually ended up with 13 studies. The review and subsequent meta-analysis revealed that panoramic radiographs had noticeably greater efficacy in terms of the CGVs as compared to the articulators in the majority of the studies. Within the articulators, the arcon types recorded slightly higher CGVs than the non-arcon variety owing to the precision of jaw movement simulation in the former. However, further studies are required to validate these findings and establish more precise guidelines for the use of CGV measurement protocols in prosthodontic practice.
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.