Trial reportJournal of oral & facial pain and headache2025
Quantifying symmetry in mandibular condyle motion: a real-time MRI approach.
Trial report in Journal of oral & facial pain and headache, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this 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.
Développement Méthodologique de l'Imagerie Par Résonance Magnétique (IRM)
Evaluation of Methodological and Technical DEvelopmeNts to Improve the Quality and Comfort of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Exam on Voluntary Subjects
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- CBCT evaluation of temporomandibular joint changes in patients with oral submucous fibrosis.Bioinformation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe temporomandibular joints (TMJs) are essential for daily function and must operate in synergy to ensure optimal jaw movement. Real-time magnetic resonance imaging (RT-MRI) enables direct visualization of mandibular condyle motion; however, its application for symmetry assessment remains insufficiently studied. This exploratory study focuses on the consistency of condylar motion symmetry assessments, including visual evaluation of raw image series and 3D trajectories calculated from RT-MRI, as well as automatically extracted quantitative parameters. Given that well-correlated parameters are more likely to be reliable, this work aims to identify optimal methods for assessing symmetry of the condylar pathway using RT-MRI.
methodsThe study includes 18 volunteers. A 2D real-time fast low angle shot (FLASH) sequence was used to acquire two sagittal and one axial planes. For quantitative analysis, mandibular condyles were segmented using a neural network. The extracted symmetry parameters were maximum displacement difference and maximum difference of amplitudes for spatial assessments, and latency and velocity peak delay for temporal evaluations. 3D trajectories were automatically generated using a previously validated method. Qualitative scoring of raw image series was conducted by two experts, and the 3D trajectories were evaluated by a dental surgeon. The agreement between qualitative scores was assessed using Cohen's kappa test, while correlations among quantitative parameters were analyzed using Spearman's test.
resultsResults showed higher agreement in the axial plane (intra-observer κ = 0.68; inter-observer κ = 0.44) than in the sagittal plane (κ = 0.51 and 0.20, respectively). Inter-planar correlations were weak to moderate (ρ = 0.21-0.48), with latency showing the strongest correlation.
conclusionsFor our dataset, latency emerged as the most robust temporal parameter. Additionally, motion analysis in the axial plane demonstrated greater consistency in both quantitative measurements and visual scoring. These findings suggest that the axial plane may be preferable for assessing motion symmetry in RT-MRI. CLINICAL
trial registration"METHODO" ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02887053, approval: CPP EST-III, 08.10.01; "EDEN" ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05218460, approval: CPP SUD-EST IV, 26.07.21.
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.