ArticleScientific reports2025
Pilot case control evaluation of artificial intelligence assisted orthodontic monitoring and pediatric patient perception.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Present and Future of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Orthodontics.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a key tool in the modernization of the healthcare industry, aiding dentists in performing their work more efficiently and effectively. The aim of this study was to evaluate orthodontic monitoring and patient perception using the AI-assisted Dental Monitoring software in children. The study was designed as a randomized controlled case-control study, including retrospective data collection through patients' medical records. Dental Monitoring application enables patients to scan or capture images of their dentition using a smartphone, allowing orthodontists to remotely check treatment progress. Children aged between 7- and 12-years undergoing treatment with Invisalign First were invited to take part. They were classified into two groups based on orthodontic monitoring method: conventional methods (control group) and Dental Monitoring (DM) software. Outcomes included demographic variables, Angle molar classification, initial number of aligners, treatment duration in months, number of refinements, number of aligners in the first refinement, number of aligners in the second refinement, number of appointments, number of emergencies, and patient perception. Data were analyzed for statistical significance, applying a 95% confidence level. The study included a total of 39 patients (20 in the DM group and 19 in the control group). Both groups were homogeneous in terms of age, sex, and malocclusion. No significant differences were observed between the two groups, except for the number of appointments, which was significantly lower in the DM group compared to the control group (p < 0.001). Regarding children's perception, 85% found scanning to be either very easy or easy, and 100% of the patients were satisfied or very satisfied with their communication with the orthodontist. Moreover, 100% of patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the DM application, and 85% would recommend the experience. The group monitored using DM showed a significant reduction in the number of appointments compared to the control group, with no significant differences in treatment duration, number of refinements, or number of aligners per refinement. Children reported a highly favorable perception of orthodontic monitoring with DM.
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.