ArticleJournal of maxillofacial and oral surgery2024
Can the Mechanism of Injury Impact the Location of a Mandibular Fracture? A Systematic Review.
Article in Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery, 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.
- Custom-made 3D PEEK plates versus 3D titanium plates for mandibular angle fracture fixation: a randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- The Use of a CAD/CAM Thermoformed Splints System in Closed Reduction of Condylar Fractures.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Orthodontic Approaches in the Management of Mandibular Fractures: A Scoping Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Mandible fractures are the second most common fractures of the facial skeleton because of the prominent position of the lower jaw. The purpose of this study was to calculate the prevalence of mandibular fractures based on their causes and locations. Materials and Method: A systematic search of 3 electronic databases from January 2010 and January 2020 was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were 359 articles identified for screening against selection criteria. The search identified 39 articles to be included in our analysis. Results: A total of 20,135 patients with 31,468 mandible fractures in this review. There was a 76% male predominance. The third decade was the most common age group (21-30). Motor vehicle accidents (39.89%) were the leading cause of mandible fractures, followed by falls (27.72%) and violence (25.35%). Condylar fractures are the most common cause of MVA and fall (33.11%, 50% respectively). Mandible body fractures are the second most common type of MVA injury (17.06%). When it came to violence, the angle of the mandible was the most common site (31.73%). Conclusions: The prevalence of mandible fractures was higher in male patients in the current study, particularly in the second and third decades of life. Road traffic accidents were the most common cause, and the condylar process of the mandible was the most frequently affected region. Demographic data such as age, gender, and mechanism of injury can help surgeons predict and identify specific areas of mandibular fracture.
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.