ArticleCureus2024
Effect of Slow Maxillary Expansion and Alternative Rapid Maxillary Expansion Protocols on Airway Volume in Cleft Palate Cases: A Cone Beam Computed Tomography Based Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Effects of clear aligner-based expansion screw and nickel-titanium palatal expander on airway dimensions and sleep parameters in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients: a randomized clinical trial.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2026Trial
- Three-dimensional CBCT evaluation of nasal and pharyngeal airway changes after rapid maxillary expansion: A study among growing children.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Pharyngeal Airway Analysis for Area and Volume in Patients Affected by Unilateral and Bilateral Cleft Lip and Palate - A Comparative Study.Annals of maxillofacial surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A total of 22 patients with cleft palate aged 8 to 12 years were selected and categorized into two groups: the first group was treated with alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction (Alt-RAMEC) using an expander with differential opening (EDO) and facemask, while the second group was treated using slow maxillary expansion (SME) using an EDO. Finally, the pharyngeal airway volume in the two groups was compared using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). CBCT scans were performed before expansion and six months following the expansion. Alveolar crest level, maxillary breadth, nasal cavity width, arch width, inclination of the molar teeth, buccal and palatal alveolar bone thickness, and maxillary alveolar width were all assessed. Paired t-tests (p=0.05) were applied to compare interphase data. The two groups showed a non-significant difference in terms of nasopharyngeal volume (cm
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.