Trial reportThe Angle orthodontist2026
Dento-facial changes and oral health-related quality of life assessment in management of anterior crossbite in mixed dentition: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in The Angle orthodontist, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of clear aligner (CA) vs removable inclined plane (RP) in improving the dentofacial changes and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in children with anterior crossbite in the mixed dentition. Materials and Methods: Twenty-four pseudo-Class III patients in the mixed dentition (8-12 years) were randomly allocated into two equal groups: the CA group treated with clear aligners, and the RP group treated with removable inclined planes. Lateral cephalometric analysis and OHRQoL questionnaires were conducted immediately before and after 4 months of intervention. The primary outcome included cephalometric changes, whereas the CPQ8-10 (children's perception questionnaire) was the secondary outcome. Data analysis included paired t-tests, independent t-tests, the Shapiro-Wilk test, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and the Mann-Whitney test. Results: Significant differences were observed between the two groups for changes in U1-SN, IMPA, L1-NB angles, and L1-NB (mm) (P < .05). However, there was no significant difference in improving the OHRQoL of patients between the CA and RP groups (P > .05). Conclusions: Both treatment approaches resulted in similar improvement in the patients OHRQoL. However, the CA group resulted in more significant proclination of the upper incisors, while the RP group showed more significant retroclination of the lower incisors.
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.