ArticlePeerJ2024
Volumetric comparison of mandibular condyles and mandibles in the different skeletal classes in the Saudi population.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Assessing the relationship between the condyle and mandible volume and the various skeletal classes is essential in orthodontic diagnosis. The current study evaluated this relationship using volumetric cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), cephalometric methods, and the correlations between them. Materials and Methods: The study examined 37 full-head CBCTs (74 condyles) from adults in the Saudi population. The condyle and mandible were separated from within the CBCT images. The volume of each segment was compared to measurements from multiple cephalometric analyses. Results: The combined total condylar volume has a moderate correlation with the maxillomandibular differential in each of the genders and in the total sample. Mandibular volume has a significant correlation with the Wits appraisal (sagittal classification) in males. It was also significantly correlated with the vertical classification using gonial angles in females and in the total sample. Conclusion: The relationship between mandible and condyle volume and cephalometric measurements is both dimensional and within the maxillomandibular complex rather than positional or related to the cranial base. Also, the correlation between the condylar and mandibular volumes and the sagittal and vertical dimensions in the orthodontic skeletal classes provides better insight into the mandibular complex.
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.