ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
3D palatal superimposition in adolescent orthodontic patients treated without extractions: method validation.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study investigated the morphological stability, trueness and precision of four palatal areas (A: medial 2/3 of third ruga and 5 mm posteriorly; B: A + additional 5 mm posteriorly; C: A + additional 6 mm wide stripe on midpalatal suture; D: almost whole palate) used for 3D superimposition of serial maxillary dental models in growing orthodontic patients treated without extractions. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective sample of 25 growing patients with pre- (T0) and post- (T1) treatment 3D dental models was used. Morphological stability was assessed using color-coded distance maps generated from superimposed T0 and T1 models. Trueness was determined by measuring the Mean Absolute Distances (MAD) within Area A between T0 and T1 models after superimposition. Precision was evaluated through the assessment of T0-T1 changes in three preselected teeth.
resultsTreatment and growth modified the palatal surface morphology at the 0.5 mm level. Trueness remained below 0.3 mm in most cases for Areas A, B, and C, with a reduced level observed for Area D. The precision outcome was significantly affected with respect to tooth torque and rotations. Area D showed the best precision, followed by B, C, and A. Area B showed the best agreement to Area C. The overall assessment favored Area B.
conclusionConsidering overall performance, area B is recommended as the area of choice for superimposing pre-to post-orthodontic treatment maxillary dental models of growing individuals treated without extractions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The suggested palatal superimposition method is broadly applicable and ensures reliable assessment of morphological changes through the superimposition of serial maxillary dental models.
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.