ReviewPakistan journal of medical sciences2024
Assessing Orofacial Esthetics in Prosthodontic Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Psychometric Properties.
Review in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 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.
- Perception of Orofacial Esthetics Using a Scan-Free Virtual Video Mock-Up: A Comparative Analysis of Self-Evaluation Versus Unknown-People Assessment.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To validate and ascertain the reliability of the Orofacial Esthetic Scale specifically within the context of prosthodontic patients, aiming to establish it as a credible and standardized tool for evaluating orofacial esthetics in this specialized cohort. Methods: The systematic analysis adhered to the guidelines outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). A systematic search using four databases PubMed /Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct along with manual and grey literature (ProQuest and Google scholar) till 30 October 2023 was performed. The risk of biasness was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist followed by validity analysis. For meta-analysis, psychometric values (Cronbach alpha and Intra class correlation coefficient) were used through MedCalc software. Results: The overall ICC value was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.94 to 0.96) and the overall Cronbach alpha value was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92 to 0.96). There was evidence of high heterogeneity and no publication bias among the studies included. Conclusion: This study underscores the pivotal role of orofacial esthetics in prosthodontic care, introducing the Orofacial Esthetic Scale as a validated tool to quantitatively assess subjective perceptions. This will highlight its potential for tailored treatment planning and improved patient outcomes.
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.