ArticleOral radiology2025
Evaluation of masticatory muscles in patients with different sagittal direction skeletal anomalies by ultrasonography and ultrasonographic elastography.
Article in Oral radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- The association of malocclusions with masseter muscle thickness based on ultrasonography measurements: a retrospective cohort study.European journal of orthodontics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluated the masseter, anterior digastric and geniohyoid muscles of individuals with similar growth and developmental periods but different sagittal skeletal malocclusions using ultrasonography and ultrasonographic elastography and to make interclass assessments.
methodsIn this study, ultrasonography and ultrasonographic elastography records of 30 Class I individuals (17 females, 13 males), 30 Class II individuals (14 females, 16 males), and 27 Class III individuals (12 females, 15 males) in the normodivergent and growth development period were used. The masseter, anterior digastric, and geniohyoid muscles of individuals were examined using ultrasonography and ultrasonographic elastography, and comparisons were made between the classes. Statistical analysis was accomplished by Mann Whitney U, One-way ANOVA, Kruskal Wallis H tests.
resultsInterclass differences were found in ultrasonography and elastography measurements of the masseter muscle. However, no differences were observed in ultrasonography measurements of the auxiliary masticatory muscles, whereas differences were seen only in the geniohyoid muscle in elastography measurements among the classes (p < 0.05).
conclusionIndividuals with different sagittal skeletal malocclusions during growth and development exhibited similar muscle sizes and elasticities, approximately close to each other.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39327351What 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.