ReviewHead and neck pathology2023
Revisiting the History of Odontoma, with Special Reference to Its Original Illustration.
Review in Head and neck pathology, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Giant odontoma: A systematic scoping review and case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
- An update on the combined surgical and orthodontic treatment of complex odontoma among growing patients young patients.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Historical Notes on Ossifying Fibroma of the Mandible.Head and neck pathology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPractically every facet of the most common odontogenic tumor, odontoma, has been covered by an extensive volume of literature. However, uncertainty about its precise history has persisted. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe historical evolution of odontoma was traced with reference to the original illustrations that accompanied European and American reports published at the beginning of the 19th century and also at the turn of the century.
resultsThe prevailing views regarding the first description of odontoma by Oudet of Paris in 1809 and the original designation "odontome" by Broca of Paris in 1867 are not entirely accurate. Before Broca's suggested term, "exostose dentaire" (dental exostosis) and "tumeur dentaire" (dental tumor) proposed by Oudet and Forget of Paris, respectively, were popular terms adopted in France, while in Briatin the terms "warty tooth" and "supernumerary teeth" proposed by Salter and Tomes of London, respectively, were widely coined. The original illustrations of complex odontoma were published by Wedl of Vienna in 1851, and in 1862 Tomes published the first drawing of compound odontoma denticles. Before the advent of diagnostic radiography in the early 1900s, spontaneous exposure or eruption of odontoma followed by secondary infection was very common. In 1887-1888, Bland Sutton of London criticized Broca's monumental research and formulated the first modern classification which, in essence, remains valid today. At that time, large osteomas of the maxilla were inappropriately classified as odontomas by many pathologists because of Bland Sutton's influential view. Interestingly, the first radiographic evidence of odontoma was published by the American oral surgeon Gilmer in 1899.
conclusionIn view of their fundamental achievements, the names of Wedl, Salter, Broca and Bland Sutton have been closely associated with the true history of odontoma.
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.