Trial reportThe Angle orthodontist2025
Early versus late intermaxillary elastics in patients with Class II malocclusion: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in The Angle orthodontist, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To compare efficacy and treatment duration of early versus late Class II elastics in patients with Class II malocclusion. Material and Methods: Forty patients were randomized into two groups based on the timing of elastics use: early and late. In the early group, light short elastics were used from the day of placement of fixed preadjusted edgewise appliances. In the late group, elastics were inserted once 0.016 × 0.022-inch stainless steel archwires were in place. Lateral cephalograms and standardized smile photographs were taken before treatment and after achieving a Class I buccal segment relationship. Treatment duration, dental, skeletal, and soft tissue measurements were then compared between the two groups. Results: Maxillary central incisors were retroclined relative to the SN plane (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.75°-11.99° and 3.96°-9.18° in the early and late groups, respectively) with clockwise rotation of the occlusal plane (95% CI: 3.75°-11.99° and 3.96°-9.18° in the early and late groups, respectively). Treatment duration to level and align and reach Class I buccal occlusion was significantly less in the early group (95% CI: 4.74-10.8 months). Comparison between groups revealed no significant differences for all measurements except MP/SN and PP/SN angles (P < .05). Conclusions: Class II elastics were equally effective and more efficient in the early group with significantly less time needed to level and align and reach Class I buccal occlusion compared to the late group.
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.