ArticleScientific reports2026
Effects of chin supported maxillary protraction on symphsis morphology.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
This controlled retrospective study aimed to evaluate the effects of maxillary protraction therapy on mandibular symphysis morphology. In this regard, 35 growing individuals with skeletal class III malocclusion due to maxillary retrognathia were assigned to two groups. The experimental group (n = 20) was treated with a Petit-type face mask (FM), while the control group (n = 15) had similar characteristics and were untreated. Linear and angular measurements related to the mandibular symphysis were evaluated on lateral cephalometric radiographs obtained before treatment (T0) and after treatment (T1). Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, paired T-tests, and independent-samples T-tests were used for statistical analyses. In the FM group, there were significant increases in the lingual height (p = 0.021), B-Pogonion (p = 0.016), and Infradentale-Menton (Id-Me; p = 0.003) parameters following treatment, whereas a significant decrease was found in the incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA) angle (p = 0.001). In the control group, there were no significant changes in either linear or angular measurements (p > 0.05). Intergroup comparison of treatment and observation-related changes revealed significant differences in the IMPA (p = 0.023) and Id-Me measurements (p = 0.048). The absence of significant differences in parameters other than the Id-Me-which could be related to the retrusive effect of the face mask on the lower incisors-suggests that face mask treatment does not have a significant short-term effect on mandibular symphysis morphology.
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.