ArticleActa stomatologica Croatica2025
Retrospective Evaluation of Tooth Agenesis in Different Regions of Turkey with Panoramic Radiography.
Article in Acta stomatologica Croatica, 2025. 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.
- Early radiographic detection and clinical implications of third-molar agenesis in Turkish children and adolescents.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Dental agenesis refers to the absence of one or more teeth, occurring in both primary and permanent dentitions. It can result in several complications, impacting functional aspects of the dentition, such as chewing and speech. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of agenesis of permanent incisors, premolars, and third molars in patients aged 8-18. The prevalences were compared according to age, gender, and the regions they live in. Material and Methods: This study was conducted in the Central Anatolia and Mediterranean regions of Turkey. It included data from 593 patients, 304 females and 289 males. The study involved a retrospective evaluation of the patients' orthopantomographic images. Descriptive statistics were employed for the analysis. Results: In the study, the prevalence of incisor agenesis among all patients was 2.4%. Premolar agenesis was found in 3.9% of patients, with the mandibular second premolar being the most commonly missing premolar (missing in 19 patients). The prevalence of third molar agenesis was 19.9% (118 patients). Incisor and premolar agenesis were more common in the Central Anatolia region than the Mediterranean region, whereas third molar agenesis was more prevalent in the Mediterranean region. In both regions, the left mandibular premolar was the most frequently missing premolar tooth, and the left maxillary third molar was the most frequently missing third molar tooth. Conclusion: This study presents a thorough analysis of the prevalence and distribution of tooth agenesis, with a particular focus on incisors, premolars, and third molars. The results emphasize the necessity of considering gender differences and specific tooth locations in the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to tooth agenesis.
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.