ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024
Mandibular Second Premolar Agenesis: A Retrospective Cross-sectional Study from Palestine.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 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.
- Analysis of vertical deficiency in infraoccluded primary molars: an investigation of dental, gingival, and alveolar parameters.Odontology · 2026Article
- Effect of mandibular second premolar hypodontia on trabecular bone structure: a fractal analysis approach.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Radiological Evaluation of Retained Primary Molars in Adolescents with Mandibular Second Premolar Agenesis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This retrospective study aimed to determine the prevalence of congenitally missing mandibular second premolars. Materials and Methods: A total of 1,843 radiographs were collected from five different cities in Palestine. Two experienced dentists independently examined the panoramic radiographs and demographic data (age and gender). Results: Among the 1,843 radiographs, 1,039 were for females (57.37%) and 804 were for males (43.63%); 13 cases had at least one congenitally mandibular second premolar. The prevalence of congenitally missing mandibular second premolars in the study population was 0.7%. There was no significant association between gender and mandibular second premolar agenesis. Unilateral agenesis was more common than bilateral, and the left side had more cases of congenitally missing mandibular second premolars than the right side. Conclusions: The prevalence of congenitally missing mandibular second premolars in this study population was 0.7%, within the range reported in other populations.
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.