ArticleBMC pediatrics2025
Reliability and reproducibility of CBCT assessment of craniomaxillary changes before and after treatment for Class III growing patients - a cautious or critical approach.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 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
backgroundTo evaluate reliability and reproducibility of 3-dimensional (3D) assessment of maxillary protraction treatment using voxel-based superimposition of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) models of the anterior cranial base in growing patients with skeletal class III malocclusion.
methodsCBCT scans were performed before and after maxillary protraction treatment for Class III malocclusion. Three observers independently constructed 162(27*2*3) 3D virtual models from CBCT scans, which had been reoriented 3D models before treatment to natural head posture, of 27 patients in software. The anterior cranial base was used to register the 3D models pre- and post- treatment. Three observers independently identified 9 landmarks(Including those in the contralateral side)and recorded in three-dimensional coordinates in the 3D models. each observer performed this three times on the pre- and post-treatment model. The mean value of the 3 sets of coordinates at different times was taken as the coordinates for each landmark. The intraobserver reliability and inter-observer reproducibility of the method for craniomaxillary changes were analyzed.
resultsThe reliability for intraobserver assessments, with ICC > 0.90 for 25 (92.6%) of intraobserver assessments. 24 of 27 (88.9%) cases showed that the accuracy of the measurement method were below 0.3 mm. 21 of the 27 cases showed that the inter-bserver reproducibility errors were below 0.3 mm; only 6 cases (22.2%) showed error ≥ 0.3 mm.
conclusionsThe reliability andreproducibility of the method for assessment of maxillary protraction treatment in growing patients with skeletal Class Ⅲmalocclusion were judged to be excellent.
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.