Trial reportBMC oral health2026
Effect of gradually increasing force magnitude on the rate of canine retraction: a split mouth randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05643443 (Effect of Gradually Increasing Force Magnitude on the Rate of Canine Retraction), which is not on this 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.
Effect of Gradually Increasing Force Magnitude on the Rate of Canine Retraction: A Split Mouth Randomized Controlled Trial
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effect of gradually increasing orthodontic force magnitude compared with a constant force magnitude on the rate of tooth movement during maxillary canine retraction.
methodsThis split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial included 15 patients (30 sides). Each patient received both interventions. On the intervention side, canine retraction was performed using nickel–titanium closed-coil springs delivering progressively increased forces of 50 g, 100 g, and 150 g over three consecutive monthly intervals. On the control side, a constant force of 150 g was applied throughout the study period. Maxillary arch impressions were obtained at baseline (T0) and at 4-week intervals for three months (T1, T2, and T3). Digital model analysis was used to assess the rate and total amount of canine movement.
resultsNo statistically significant difference was observed between the two sides in the monthly rate of canine retraction at any time point (P > 0.05). The total distance of canine movement was 2.58 ± 0.70 mm in the control side and 2.24 ± 0.82 mm in the intervention side, with no significant intergroup difference (mean difference = 0.34 ± 1.08 mm, P > 0.05).
conclusionGradually increasing orthodontic force magnitude did not enhance the rate of maxillary canine retraction compared with a conventional constant force protocol. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Progressive force escalation during canine retraction does not provide a clinical advantage over constant force application, supporting the use of simpler, continuous force mechanics in routine orthodontic practice.
trial registrationThe trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05643443. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05643443 . Registered December 18, 2022.
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.