ArticleCureus2023
Three-Dimensional Assessment and Comparison of the Maxillary Tuberosity Between Skeletal and Dental Class I and Class II Adults in Maxillary Third Molar Agenesis Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Human Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Discriminating between the maxillary tuberosity and the alveolar tuberosity- a critical pictorial review.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2025Review
- Anatomical factors of the maxillary tuberosity that influence molar distalization.Korean journal of orthodontics · 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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AIM AND
objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess and compare the dimensions (width (W), height (H), and length (L)) of the tuberosity distal to maxillary permanent second molar in individuals with skeletal and dental Class I and Class II malocclusions who had maxillary third molar agenesis. METHODOLOGY: Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used to measure the left (L) and right (R) anatomical tuberosity dimensions in three dimensions using the WillMaster software (HDX WILL Corporation, Korea). The measurements were compared between Class I (n = 35) and Class II (n = 35) normo-hypodivergent adult subjects. The dimensions were measured at regular 2 mm intervals from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) and distovestibular root of the maxillary second molar in terms of the width (e.g., W1, W2, and W3), height (e.g., H1, H2, and H3), length (e.g., L1, L2, and L3) to the posterior limit of the tuberosity. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U tests, and intraclass correlation coefficient tests.
resultsThe width of the tuberosity at LW0, LW1, and LW2 was significantly higher in Class I compared to that in Class II. The right tuberosity in Class II showed significantly higher values in height at all reference points. The right tuberosity at RL0 and RL1 exhibited significantly higher values in the length of the Class II group compared to the Class I group.
conclusionsThe dimensions of the maxillary tuberosity (width, height, and length) varied between the Class I and Class II groups. Wider maxillary tuberosities were observed in the Class I group, while the Class II group had greater height and length dimensions of the tuberosity.
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.