ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2024
Comparison of the Opinions of Adolescents With Different Orthodontic Treatment Needs.
Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) among adolescents granted (G) versus not granted (NG) publicly funded orthodontic treatment. MATERIALS AND
methodsAdolescents aged 15-20 years who were granted versus not granted publicly funded orthodontic treatment responded to a web-based survey, assessing OHRQoL in relation to functional impact, psychological impact, and motivators for orthodontic treatment. Before the survey, pretesting of the questionnaire was conducted to ensure its reliability. Differences between the groups were tested using the chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U-tests. Reliability was assessed using Cohen's κ and Pearson's correlation coefficient during the pretest phase.
resultsOne hundred and forty patients, equally distributed between a G and an NG group, responded to the survey. Gender, age, and demographic distribution were comparable in both groups. All respondents expressed a high subjective treatment need and similar answers regarding functional aspects. Orthodontic treatment motivators (G: 86.2% and NG: 94.7%, p = 0.443) were primarily related to improved self-esteem, overall well-being, facial appearance, and being able to laugh without embarrassment. The NG group expressed a more negative OHRQoL impact due to the appearance of their teeth compared with the G group (p < 0.001) and a negative impact caused by the position of their teeth (p < 0.001).
conclusionsOrthodontic treatment need indices should aim to reinforce subjective measures as adolescents express similar motivators for orthodontic treatment, regardless of the clinician's objectively based decision about treatment need.
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.