ArticleFrontiers in oral health2026
Case Report: A comparative evaluation of anterior open bite orthodontic treatment outcomes and stability of results in monozygotic twins.
Article in Frontiers in oral health, 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
Anterior open bite treatment represents an orthodontic challenge, mainly due to its' intricate etiology. This report presents the evolution of the orthopedic and orthodontic treatment of two female monozygotic twins, aged 10. Both twins presented dental and skeletal anterior open bite, tongue thrust, oral breathing, narrow maxilla with protrusion and fake spaces, dental and skeletal class 2, a hyperdivergent growth pattern and cervical vertebrae maturation stage 3. The therapeutic approach for both twins included an ENT examination, orthopedic treatment by means of High Pull Head Gear, trans palatal bar with an acrylic button at the level of the palatal loop, myofunctional exercises addressing the tongue thrust and the tonicity of the perioral muscles, a Roth 0.022 inch fixed preadjusted appliance and a tongue crib. Treatment results were different in the two patients, as for one of the twins tongue thrust was eliminated, enabling orthopedic and orthodontic correction of the open bite and presenting no signs of relapse at follow-up appointment, while for the other twin tongue thrust persisted, therefor the orthodontic correction of the open bite was only partial and presented with tendency toward relapse at follow-up appointment. Although the orthodontic diagnosis and therapeutic approaches were similar for both patients, the clinical outcomes were different mainly due to patients' compliance in the management of the tongue thrust and possibly, in the wearing protocol of the High Pull Head Gear.
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.