Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37405198›Full record

ArticleImaging science in dentistry2023

Cone-beam computed tomographic reconstructions in the evaluation of maxillary impacted canines.

David MacDonald, Sharifa Alebrahim, Edwin Yen, Jolanta Aleksejuniene

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Numb Chin Sign and the Role of Radiology.International dental journal · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

David MacDonaldFaculty of Dentistry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6718-9296
Sharifa AlebrahimFaculty of Dentistry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9232-0850
Edwin YenFaculty of Dentistry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8930-5406
Jolanta AleksejunieneFaculty of Dentistry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6789-6089
University of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Prior to cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), orthodontic competence included radiological interpretation. Nevertheless, maxillary impacted canines (MICs), because of their position and adjacent complex anatomy, have been challenging to interpret, particularly with regard to root resorption. Although CBCT cross-sectional reconstructions of MICs yielded clearer insights into its diagnosis and treatment planning, the value of simultaneously using 2 different cross-sectional or multiplanar reconstructions of the CBCT datasets - orthogonal and curved/panoramic multiplanar reconstructions - has hitherto not been considered. Materials and Methods: Both orthogonal and curved/panoramic multiplanar reconstruction series of 5 screenshots were each reconstructed from the 5 cm × 5 cm CBCT datasets of 15 separate MICs. Fifteen credentialled and experienced orthodontist volunteers reviewed 2 separate PowerPoints of 15 randomized series each, 1 week apart. Their review considered 6 factors that could affect treatment: the position and level of the MIC, the presence or absence of root resorption, ankylosis, cysts, and dilaceration. Results: All 15 orthodontists were statistically similar regarding overall years of experience and of CBCT use. Although either reconstruction alone allowed the orthodontists to determine whether ankylosis and, to a lesser extent, most of the other features were present or absent in the MIC, reviewing both reconstructions together was necessary to determine whether root resorption was present or absent in the adjacent tooth. Conclusion: Reviewing both orthogonal and curved/panoramic multiplanar reconstructions was necessary to evaluate the presence or absence of root resorption in the teeth adjacent to MICs and that of many other features.

Indexed as

Cone-beam Computed TomographyRoot ResorptionTooth AnkylosisTooth, Impacted

Identifiers

PMID37405198
PMCPMC10315227
OpenAlexW4377288501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.