ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2025
External apical root resorption assessment revisited: a scoping review.
Article 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To provide a comprehensive critique of the diagnosis of root resorption using panoramic and periapical radiography, including discussion of the various methods of measurement, severity spectrum, and to shed light on a significant factor predisposing to resorption: treatment duration. Materials and Methods: The articles reviewed involved human subjects undergoing buccal fixed orthodontic treatment, diagnosed by panoramic or intraoral radiographs at the beginning and end of treatment. Treatment duration and external apical root resorption (EARR) had to be recorded to be included in the study. Relevant sources were searched using various platforms including PubMed, Scopus, and WoS. All sources of evidence, regardless of language, were included in the study. Results: The search strategy yielded 704 studies; screening by title and abstract yielded 389 articles for full-text review. Forty studies were finally included and categorized according to the type of radiograph used to diagnose EARR: authors of 18 studies used panoramic radiographs, and authors of 22 studies used intraoral radiographs. Conclusions: In this study, we revealed a lack of agreement among authors concerning the diagnosis and measurement methods of external apical root resorption, resulting in inconsistencies in the results. Additionally, patient- and treatment-related factors, including treatment duration, were found to be inconsistently associated with the development of EARR. Standardization of diagnostic protocols and refinement of measurement techniques are essential to improve the accuracy of orthodontic care.
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.