ArticleDental press journal of orthodontics2025
Cone-beam computed tomography prescription by Brazilian orthodontists.
Article in Dental press journal of orthodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveTo investigate the factors that influence Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging prescription in Brazilian orthodontics practice.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was performed in 2020 using an online survey sent to all Brazilian orthodontists registered at the Federal Council of Dentistry. The variables were the orthodontists' demographic features and the CBCT prescription in clinical practice. A descriptive and comparative analysis was implemented using frequencies and the chi-square test, respectively.
resultsThe sample consisted of 939 respondents. CBCT prescription and the use of guidelines for imaging in orthodontics were confirmed by 81.9% and 52.6% of the sample, respectively. Training for CBCT was reported by 37.0%, mainly during specialization programs in orthodontics (50.0%), about one to five years ago (64.7%), with a duration of 4 to 8 hours (53.4%). The CBCT prescription was indicated predominantly for specific cases (71.0%), and was generally related to impacted teeth (74.7%), orthognathic surgical patients (46.2%), and root resorption (41.9%). The results indicated differences in CBCT prescription between the Brazilian macro-regions, regarding the criteria for prescription, use of guidelines, reasons for not recommending the exam, diagnostic purposes, voxel size, and training for the use of CBCT (p<0.05).
conclusionThe prescription of CBCT was adequate by most Brazilian orthodontists for cases involving impacted teeth, surgical interventions, and root resorption. However, adherence to imaging prescription guidelines was observed in less than 50% of the sample. There is a deficiency in understanding technical parameters and a lack of specific training on CBCT. Disparities were evident among the Brazilian macro-regions, particularly concerning CBCT costs and other variables analyzed.
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.