ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2024
Comparison of labio-palatal incisor movement between two wear protocols: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in The Angle orthodontist, 2024. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cytotoxic effect of 3D-printed and thermoformed clear aligner materials on human oral fibroblasts: AnKorean journal of orthodontics · 2025Article
- AI-driven prediction of treatment outcome in aligner therapy: A pilot study.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Efficacy of planned moderate to severe torque changes in mandibular central incisors with an initial series of Invisalign aligners: a retrospective cohort study.The Angle orthodontist · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the accuracy of the Invisalign appliance in achieving predicted angular tooth movement of the maxillary central incisors, to locate the center of rotation in a labio-palatal direction, and to investigate any difference between 1-weekly and 2-weekly wear protocols. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study involved a retrospective sample of two groups of 46 Class I adult subjects treated non-extraction with different protocols of 1-weekly and 2-weekly wear. The pretreatment, predicted outcome and achieved outcome digital models were superimposed and measured using metrology software. Angular and center-of-rotation measurements in the sagittal plane for the maxillary right central incisor were analyzed.
resultsThere was a statistically significant difference between predicted and achieved angular measurements (P < .005) for labial tooth movements regardless of wear protocol. For palatal movements, no statistically significant difference was observed (P > .05). A small amount of overexpression was observed in some cases. Regarding crown and root control, uncontrolled tipping was the most predictable. No statistically significant difference was found between predicted and achieved center of rotation, but the confidence interval was wide. No statistically significant difference (P > .05) was found between the two wear protocols for the parameters measured.
conclusionsFor maxillary central incisors, labial angular movements were not as accurate as palatal movements. Overcorrection could be recommended with careful clinical monitoring due to the possibility of overexpression. Control of root movements may be unpredictable, and further research is required to draw stronger conclusions. For the parameters measured in this clinical sample, there was no difference between the two wear protocols.
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.