ArticleScientific reports2025
Multi-step finite element simulation for clear aligner space closure: a proof-of-concept compensation protocol.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomechanical effects of varying intrusion-to-retraction ratios on anterior tooth displacement during extraction space closure with clear aligners: an iterative finite element analysis.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Pressure-based finite element analysis of setup distance in clear aligner canine retraction comparing bodily and tipping movements.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Fit analysis of 3D-printed versus thermoformed clear aligners for labial tooth movement using micro-CT: an in vitro study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- External Apical Root Resorption Following Orthodontic Treatment with Clear Aligners Versus Fixed Appliances: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Finite element analysis of clear aligner with overhanging attachments and extended gingival coverage for interdental space closure.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Clear aligners have transformed orthodontic treatment; however, they exhibit limited effectiveness in closing extraction spaces due to cumulative movement errors and excessive tipping. This proof-of-concept study introduces an innovative multi-step finite element method (FEM) for simulating sequential clear aligner applications in extraction space closure. A compensation protocol, incorporating an adaptive iterative FEM, was compared with a conventional protocol, and movement precision and unintended tipping were analyzed. The results demonstrated that the compensation protocol significantly reduced tipping (≤ 1°) compared to the conventional approach (> 6°) and minimized the mismatch between crown and root movements. Additionally, the compensation protocol consistently maintained a high achievement rate, preventing the progressive loss of movement efficiency typically observed with conventional protocols. It also provided a more controlled vertical displacement, thereby reducing unwanted extrusion. Furthermore, synchronized crown-root movement contributed to more stable bodily movement, ensuring that teeth followed the intended trajectory more accurately. These findings highlight the potential of the compensation protocol in improving treatment predictability and accuracy in extraction cases. This approach enables systematic adjustment of aligner design based on actual tooth movement, offering an optimized strategy for clear aligner biomechanics and potentially enhancing clinical outcomes in orthodontic treatment.
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.