ArticleActa stomatologica Croatica2025
Reliability of Zagreb 82 MOD Cephalometric Assessment in Determining the Facial Growth Pattern.
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 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.
- Depth of Curve of Spee in Relation to Craniofacial and Dental Morphology.Acta stomatologica Croatica · 2026Article
- Protocols and Trends in Maintaining the Stability of Orthodontic Treatment Outcomes in Croatia over 10 Years: A Repeated Cross - Sectional Study.Acta stomatologica Croatica · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate accuracy and reliability of the existing cephalometric analysis Zagreb82 MOD in determining the facial growth pattern. Materials and methods: Of all patients aged 10-17 years without missing teeth, craniofacial anomalies and previous orthodontic medical history, who were attending Department of Orthodontics, University Hospital Centre Zagreb in years 2021 and 2022, lateral cephalograms were examined. Subsequently, subjects were collected and divided into two groups: eugnathic group (N=50, SNA 81°±3.5°, SNB 78.5°±3°, ANB 2.5°±2°, Wits -1±2mm, Angle class. I, overbite 1-3.5mm, overjet 1-3.5mm, dystopia<3mm, total crowding<3mm, total diastemas<3mm) and test group (N=129, overbite>4mm for deep bite and overbite<-0.1mm for open bite). In the eugnathic group, reference values were calculated for ten skeletal parameters and a corrected analysis was created. In the test group, facial growth patterns (horizontal, neutral or vertical) were determined, within the corrected and Zagreb82 MOD analysis. The T-test was used to examine the differences between the corrected and the Zagreb82 MOD analysis. The McNemar test was performed to compare the distribution of facial growth patterns between the tested parameters within and between analyses. Results: Differences were observed in the reference values of saddle angle, Y-axis, articular angle, mandibular angle, Björk's Sum and upper section of mandibular angle (p<.05). The distribution of facial growth patterns according to Y-axis, intermaxillary angle, mandibular angle, Bjork's Sum also differed between the two analyzes (p<.001). In the corrected values analysis, there was no significant difference in the distribution of facial growth patterns between Björk's Sum, mandibular inclination, and intermaxillary angle (p>.05). Conclusion: The reliability of Zagreb82 MOD analysis in defining facial growth pattern should be taken with caution. Björk's Sum, intermaxillary angle and inclination of mandible are equitable parameters in determining the facial growth pattern within the corrected analysis.
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.