ArticleBMC oral health2025
Relationship of finger dermatoglyphics with ameloglyphics and their values as dental caries predictors in primary teeth.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the clinical setting, it would be useful to predict which children are at the highest risk of caries to take effective preventive measures. This study aims to evaluate the relationship between finger dermatoglyphics and ameloglyphics and to predict caries susceptibility of primary teeth in association with finger dermatoglyphics.
methodsFinger dermatoglyphics and ameloglyphics were recorded using the stamp ink pad and cellophane tape techniques, respectively. The association between finger dermatoglyphics and ameloglyphics was analyzed. The hypocalcified areas, micromorphological patterns and the microchemical weight contents of the enamel were investigated using a light microscope, a scanning electron microscope, and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy.
resultsThere was a significant association between the fingerprint dermatoglyphics and ameloglyphics (Fisher's exact test = 29.503, P = 0.000) and, this association was a moderate one (Cramér's V = 0.385). The hypocalcified areas of enamel in the form of lamellae, tufts, and spindles were predominated in the teeth related to the arch fingerprint and less predominated in the teeth related to the loop fingerprint patterns. Micromorphological investigation showed enamel rods of irregular and uneven thickness in the teeth related to the arch fingerprint pattern. Whereas, enamel rods were of regular and even thickness in the teeth related to the loop fingerprint patterns. Microchemical analysis for the weight content (kα) of Ca, P, C, and, O elements in the enamel of the teeth related to the arch, loop and whorl fingerprints patterns revealed that the mean values and standard deviations were 23.53 ± 0.15, 25.72 ± 0.02 and 24.77 ± 0.02 for Ca; 12.20 ± 0.05, 13.02 ± 0.01 and 12.17 ± 0.01 for P; 29.47 ± 0.02, 28.77 ± 0.02 and 29.24 ± 0.02 for C; and 34.51 ± 0.01, 32.36 ± 0.02 and 33.68 ± 0.02 for O, respectively. One-way ANOVA statistical test revealed significant differences for the Ca, P, C and O weight content (kα) between three groups (P value = 0.000).
conclusionThere is a moderate association between finger dermatoglyphics and ameloglyphics, and finger dermatoglyphics could be used as a handy tool for predicting carious lesions in primary teeth.
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.