ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Preformed Elastodontic Appliances: Awareness and Attitude of Orthodontists and General Dental Practitioners.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retrospective Descriptive Case Series on the Use of AMCOPBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of an Elastodontic Bioactivator Versus High-Pull Headgear for the Treatment of Skeletal Class II Hyperdivergent Pediatric Patients: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Effects of AMCOPJournal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Facial Aesthetic Changes in Growing Class II Patients Treated with Herbst or Elastodontics: A Retrospective Study.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
- Perceived Orthodontic Needs and Attitudes towards Early Evaluation and Interventions: A Survey-Based Study among Parents of Italian School-Aged Children.Clinics and practice · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreformed elastodontic appliances (EAs) have been described as safe, cost-effective, and easy-to-use devices for interceptive orthodontic treatment in growing patients. This study aimed to assess the knowledge and the attitude of dentists toward the use of EAs and to compare the behaviors of orthodontists (Os) with those of general dental practitioners (GDPs).
methodsAn anonymous survey was distributed among dentists through social media. Twenty-two items were divided as follows: characteristics of respondents; general knowledge about EAs; section for EA-users; and section for EA non-users. Chi-squared tests were used to analyze differences in responses between groups.
resultsParticipants included 226 Os and 168 GDPs. The majority in both groups reported having adequate knowledge about EAs and utilizing them in their practice. GDPs usually use EAs to treat children during the early phase of growth, while Os also use EAs to address orthodontic problems in different stages of dentition, experiencing a chair time reduction compared with traditional appliances. Regarding EA non-users, GDPs seem not to find an application among their patients, whereas Os reported not having enough patient compliance during treatment.
conclusionsAlthough treatment with EAs is common among all dentists, differences exist between Os and GDPs in the awareness and application, as well as in the reasons provided for not using EAs.
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.