Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40275289›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2025

Public perception of the advertised claims of Damon® appliance system in Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional survey-based study.

Nabeel Almotairy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Nabeel AlmotairyDepartment of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Qassim University, P.O. Box 4732, Buraidah, 51452, Saudi Arabia. N.S.Almotairy@qu.edu.sa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe clinical validity of self-ligating brackets' advertised claims, such as those for the Damon® appliance system, has been explored, but public awareness remains underexamined. This study assessed Saudi public perceptions of these claims. MATERIALS AND

methodsA web-based survey distributed via social media evaluated perceptions of Damon system claims, including treatment efficiency, patient discomfort, oral hygiene maintenance, and treatment esthetic results. Participants were also asked to outline their perception of Damon's appliance cost. Responses were ranked on a Likert scale and analyzed using the Chi-square test with Bonferroni corrections.

resultsOf 918 adults, 11% were familiar with the Damon system. Among Damon appliance-aware respondents, 64.4% believed it was superior to traditional braces. Around 56.4% thought it required fewer visits, and 49.5% believed treatment time was shorter, though many were neutral or uncertain. Regarding tooth extraction needs, 43.6% agreed it required lower needs, while 48.5% believed it causes less discomfort. About 46.5% agreed it was easier to maintain oral hygiene, and 54.5% thought it provided better esthetic results. Notably, 52.5% mistakenly believed it was cheaper than traditional braces. However, no major association was found between socio-demographics and Damon appliance knowledge, but females were more likely to perceive it as superior (P = .012).

conclusionsThis study highlighted the dissimilarities between public perception and scientific evidence regarding the Damon system. These mixed findings suggest a need for guidelines in orthodontic advertising to prevent potential misinformation. Providing the public with reliable, evidence-based information is crucial for supporting informed decision-making in orthodontic care.

Indexed as

AdvertisingAttitude to HealthOrthodontic BracketsPublic OpinionAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEsthetics, DentalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOral HygieneSaudi ArabiaTooth ExtractionYoung AdultAdvertisementDamon systemPatient knowledgeSelf-ligatingTreatment efficiency

Identifiers

PMID40275289
PMCPMC12023427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.