Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38107055›Full record

ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2023

Comparing the prevalence of impacted teeth through radiographic evidence among orthodontic and general populations: A secondary data analysis.

Bassam S Alalola, Farah S Almasoud, Khulud B Alghamdi, Lama M Almalki, Yara A Alodan, Seba N Alotaibi, Showq R Alali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors.

Bassam S AlalolaPreventive Dental Sciences Department, College of Dentistry, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Farah S AlmasoudCollege of Dentistry, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Khulud B AlghamdiCollege of Dentistry, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Lama M AlmalkiCollege of Dentistry, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Yara A AlodanCollege of Dentistry, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Seba N AlotaibiCollege of Dentistry, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Showq R AlaliCollege of Dentistry, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: There is noticeable variability in reporting the prevalence of impacted teeth, which can be attributed to the variability in the age, gender, and type of populations investigated Materials and Methods: Panoramic radiographs were examined retrospectively for patients who attended dental clinics at King Abdulaziz Medical City and the College of Dentistry at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences (KSAU-HS) Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The sampling frame for the orthodontic population included digital records of 2998 patients randomly selected from an original 8000 patients treated from 2016 to 2022 in the orthodontic clinic. For the general population, 3002 patients were randomly selected from an original 15000 patients treated at the dental college from 2016 to 2022. A tooth was considered impacted if it failed to erupt after two years of the expected complete root formation. Results: The prevalence of at least a single impacted tooth was higher in the orthodontic population (13.2 %) than in the general population (11.2 %). However, this difference was not statistically significant, p = 0.103. The orthodontic population had a significantly higher prevalence of impacted #13, #11,#23,#25. In contrast, the general population had a significantly higher prevalence of all third molars impaction (p < 0.005). Conclusion: Although the prevalence of at least a single tooth impaction between the orthodontic and general populations was not significantly different, the type of teeth differs. Hence, understanding the type of population investigated while reporting the prevalence of impacted teeth is critical in understanding the variability between different reports.

Indexed as

Impacted teethOrthodontic populationPanoramic radiographsPrevalence

Identifiers

PMID38107055
PMCPMC10724346

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.