ReviewCureus2024
Patient Satisfaction Following Orthodontic Treatment: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Orthodontic and Maxillofacial Surgery Treatment in Achondroplasia for Orofacial Alterations: A Systematic Review and Preliminary Age-Stratified Guidelines.Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2026Pooled it
- Comparing Facial Attractiveness and Professional Acceptance Between Real and AI-Generated Orthodontic Treatment Outcome Images.Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2026Article
- Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Preliminary Psychometric Evaluation of the Malay Orthodontic Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire and Patient Satisfaction Following Fixed Orthodontic Treatment in Malaysia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Perception of oral hygiene during orthodontic treatment: an eye-tracking and cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Review
- Patient satisfaction with orthodontic treatment outcomes: a cross-sectional study at Tabriz postgraduate orthodontic department.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Review
- Predicting patient satisfaction in digital orthodontics using a KAC based model integrating AI support and risk stratification.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comparative analysis of lingual versus labial orthodontics on patient comfort and treatment efficiency.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Therapeutic extractions in orthodontics: An exploratory survey based study.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Determinants of orthodontic treatment acceptance among university students in Northern China: a structural equation modeling approach.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Digital Smile Design and Patient-Centered Outcomes in Esthetic Restorative Dentistry: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Article
- The Interaction Between Orthodontics and Periodontal Tissue Remodeling :.Galen medical journal · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become increasingly important in orthodontic treatment as they reflect patients' perceptions of treatment outcomes. Understanding patient satisfaction with orthodontic treatment is crucial for improving healthcare delivery and patient-centered care. This systematic review aimed to critically appraise the evidence regarding patient satisfaction after orthodontic treatment, exploring the effects of different treatment types, patient demographics, and other factors on satisfaction levels. Eight electronic bibliographic databases were searched without publication time or language restrictions, including PubMed®, Scopus®, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science™, Embase®, Google™ Scholar, Trip, and OpenGrey. A manual search was conducted on the references in the included papers. Eligibility criteria were established based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study (PICOS) framework. Studies were included if they reported patient satisfaction levels following orthodontic treatment using standardized questionnaires. Two reviewers independently collected and analyzed the data. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool (RoB2) for randomized clinical trials, and the methodologic quality for cohort and cross-sectional studies was assessed using the modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Fourteen studies employed various questionnaires and timings to gauge post-orthodontic treatment satisfaction. Patient satisfaction levels were generally high, with most studies reporting satisfaction rates above 91%. Fixed orthodontic appliances were associated with higher satisfaction levels compared to removable appliances. While age and gender did not significantly influence satisfaction, the quality of care and doctor-patient relationships were crucial factors in patient satisfaction. This systematic review proves that patient satisfaction with orthodontic treatment is generally high, with fixed appliances and positive doctor-patient relationships contributing to higher satisfaction levels. However, the quality of the evidence was moderate to low, highlighting the need for further high-quality clinical studies in this area.
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.