ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2025
Sex-specific accuracy of various mixed dentition analysis methods : A population-based cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of different mixed dentition analysis methods in predicting the mesiodistal diameters (MDD) of unerupted permanent canines and premolars (PCP) in a Turkish population and to determine the most reliable method for clinical application.
methodsThis research represents a retrospective, population-based cross-sectional study. Seven commonly used maxilla (Mx) and mandible (Md) unerupted PCP mesiodistal diameter prediction methods (Tanaka-Johnston, Moyers, Tränkmann, Legovic, Gross-Hasund, Bachmann, and Melgaço methods) were compared. The study included 120 Turkish children (60 males, 60 females) aged 13-16 years. MDD was measured using digital dental models. The predicted values were analyzed for accuracy by comparing them with the actual tooth diameters. Statistical analyses assessed the differences between the methods and their reliability in male and female subjects.
resultsFor the investigated Turkish population, the Gross-Hasund (Mx female: 0.32 ± 1.07 mm; Mx male: 0.22 ± 0.79 mm; Md female: 0.29 ± 0.79 mm; Md male: 0.55 ± 0.80 mm) and Bachmann methods (Mx female: 0.26 ± 1.04; Mx male: 0.24 ± 0.82 mm; Md female: 0.17 ± 0.72 mm; Md male: 0.52 ± 0.83 mm) provided the most accurate predictions, with minimal deviation from actual tooth sizes. The Tanaka-Johnston and Moyers methods tended to overestimate tooth sizes in males and underestimate them in females. The Tränkmann method showed the highest prediction error, particularly in males (Mx: 2.98 ± 1.40 mm; Md: 3.05 ± 0.78 mm). Sex differences were statistically significant in most methods, highlighting the necessity for population- and sex-specific adjustments in mixed dentition analyses.
conclusionThe findings suggest that currently available prediction methods may not fully apply to the Turkish population without modifications. The Gross-Hasund and Bachmann methods were the most dependable, whereas the Tränkmann method showed significant discrepancies. Developing population-specific regression equations may improve the accuracy of mixed dentition analysis and enhance orthodontic treatment planning in Turkish individuals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40828390What 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.