ReviewCureus2026
Decision-Making for Space Maintenance After the Premature Loss of Primary First Molars: A Clinically Oriented Narrative Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this narrative review is to critically integrate the available evidence on space changes following the premature loss of primary first molars and to develop a clinically orientated, evidence-based decision-making framework for space maintenance. A clinically focused narrative review was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar databases. Studies that met the eligibility criteria and were published in the English language between January 1998 and December 2025 were included. Fourteen primary studies and six systematic reviews were selected based on PECO (population, exposure, control, and outcome) criteria. Evidence was synthesized narratively, rather than through a quantitative meta-analysis, due to substantial heterogeneity. Eruption and stable intercuspation of the first permanent molar, as well as a leptoprosopic facial growth pattern, consistently emerged as independent predictors of clinically relevant space loss. In contrast, archetype, molar relationship, time elapsed since extraction, and crowding functioned primarily as modifying factors. Clinical decision-making should be individualized using a structured, risk-based framework that integrates biological and occlusal determinants rather than relying solely on tooth loss.
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.