Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39006574›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Comparison of Speech Defects in Different Types of Malocclusion.

Sai Vyshnavi Palakolanu, Kiran Kumar Dodda, Sri Harsha Yelchuru, Jyothsna Kurapati

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sai Vyshnavi PalakolanuGeneral Dentistry, Drs. Sudha & Nageswara Rao Siddhartha Institute of Dental Sciences, Vijayawada, IND.
Kiran Kumar DoddaOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Drs. Sudha & Nageswara Rao Siddhartha Institute of Dental Sciences, Vijayawada, IND.
Sri Harsha YelchuruOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Dr. YSR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada, IND.
Jyothsna KurapatiOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Drs. Sudha & Nageswara Rao Siddhartha Institute of Dental Sciences, Vijayawada, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Speech has a great impact on human evolution, allowing for the widespread knowledge and advancement of tools. Difficulty in pronouncing one or more sounds is the most common speech impairment. Speech defects are more commonly associated with class III malocclusion patients (difficulty in pronouncing 's' and 't' sounds), the second in line is class II malocclusion (difficulty in pronouncing 's' and 'z' sounds), and speech distortions are least affected in class I malocclusion (difficulty in pronouncing 's' and 'Sh'). Most patients with dentofacial disharmonies and speech distortions need orthodontic care and orthognathic surgery to resolve their issues with mastication, aesthetics, and speech. Aims and objectives To compare and assess speech difficulties in different types of malocclusion. Materials and methods The study was conducted over 160 subjects for three and half months. All of them were evaluated for speech defects before they received orthodontic treatment. The main basis of this study is according to Angle's classification of malocclusion. The subjects were segregated according to Angle's classification of malocclusion. Malocclusion traits that are included in this study are Angle's class I, Angle's class II division I and division II, and Angle's class III. Results According to the results, out of 160 subjects, labio-dental speech defects are observed in 8% where n=13 of the study participants, linguodental speech defects are observed in 2% where n=3, lingua-alveolar speech defects are present in 54% where n=86, and bilabial speech defects are observed in 2% where n=3 of the study participants. Here 'n' represents the frequency of the subjects. Severe speech defects are seen in Angle's class III malocclusion. Results according to the type of malocclusion include: labio-dental speech defects are seen in 37.5% in class I, 25% in class II division I, 0% in class II division II, and 37.5% in class III. Linguodental speech defects are seen in class III malocclusion subjects only. Lingua-alveolar sounds are seen in 27.8% of class I, 29.6% of class II division I, 1.9% of class II division II, and 40.7% of class III. Bilabial speech defects are only seen in class II division I subjects. According to the results, only lingua-alveolar speech defects are statistically significant, and more severe speech defects were observed in class III malocclusion. Conclusion Speech plays an important role in affecting the quality of life of people. Different types of malocclusion traits are associated with different types of speech defects.

Indexed as

angles classificationlinguo alveolar soundsmalocclusionspeech defectsspeech distortion

Identifiers

PMID39006574
PMCPMC11245716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.