Trial reportPloS one2026
Randomized controlled trial comparing AI-assisted digital and conventional orthodontics: Superior PAR reduction and occlusal outcomes.
Trial report in PloS one, 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
backgroundAdvances in digital orthodontics and artificial intelligence (AI) planning have the potential to enhance treatment precision, but randomized evidence based on the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index remains limited.
methodsIn this single-center, parallel-group randomized controlled trial registered retrospectively in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2500108499), 140 patients aged 12-35 years with Angle Class I malocclusion were randomized to receive an AI-assisted digital workflow (Digital and AI group) or conventional fixed appliances (Conventional group). PAR scores were assessed at baseline (T0), 6-month intervals (T1), and immediately after treatment completion (T2) by calibrated, blinded examiners following British Standards Institute criteria. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle, applying independent t-tests, χ²/Fisher's exact tests, repeated-measures mixed-effects models, and multivariable linear regression. Effect sizes were expressed as mean difference (MD) or relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
resultsBaseline PAR scores did not differ significantly between groups (MD = 0.63, 95% CI: -0.13 to 1.40; p = 0.105). At T2, the Digital and AI group had lower mean PAR scores (4.88 ± 0.45) than the Conventional group (7.81 ± 0.70; MD = 2.93, 95% CI: 2.73-3.13; p < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients in the Digital and AI group achieved ≥70% PAR reduction (82.9% vs 50.0%; RR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.27-2.17; p < 0.001). Repeated-measures mixed-effects analysis showed significant effects of intervention, time, and their interaction (all p < 0.001), indicating different improvement trajectories between groups. Multivariable regression identified allocation to the Digital and AI group, higher baseline PAR, and younger age as independent predictors of greater PAR reduction. No severe adverse events occurred, and no participants were lost to follow-up between T0 and T2.
conclusionsUnder controlled trial conditions, the AI-assisted digital workflow produced greater short-term improvements in PAR-based occlusal outcomes than conventional fixed appliances. These findings suggest a potential benefit of integrating an AI-assisted digital system into orthodontic practice; however, conclusions are limited to short-term occlusal changes, and further multicenter studies with longer follow-up, patient-reported outcomes, and economic evaluation are warranted.
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.