ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Integration of digital technologies in orthodontic treatment of children and adolescents: a prospective non-randomized comparative study on personalized therapy in the 12-18 age group.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives: Clear aligner therapy combined with digital planning and remote monitoring is increasingly adopted in orthodontics, yet prospective comparative data in adolescents remain limited. This prospective non-randomized study compared short-term outcomes of an aligner-based digital orthodontic pathway versus conventional fixed appliances in adolescents with mild-to-moderate mandibular crowding. Materials and methods: In this prospective non-randomized comparative study, 78 adolescents (aged 12-18 years) with mild-to-moderate mandibular anterior crowding received either conventional fixed appliances or a digital pathway incorporating intraoral scanning, virtual treatment planning, clear aligners, and AI-assisted remote monitoring. Follow-up lasted 24 weeks. The primary outcome was change in Little's Irregularity Index (LII). Secondary outcomes included treatment duration, clinic visits, chair time, patient satisfaction, and caregiver satisfaction. Results: Both groups showed substantial alignment improvement. Mean LII reduction was 5.09 ± 0.57 mm in the digital group versus 4.29 ± 0.37 mm in the conventional group, with the between-group difference of 0.80 mm (95% CI, 0.59-1.02 mm), not reaching the prespecified clinical relevance threshold of 1.2 mm. The digital pathway required fewer in-office visits (2.46 vs. 4.46, Conclusion: In this non-randomized study, the digital orthodontic pathway and conventional fixed appliances produced comparable short-term alignment outcomes in adolescents. The digital approach demonstrated advantages in treatment efficiency, resource utilization, and patient experience. These findings support the integration of digital technologies in adolescent orthodontic care, though randomized trials are needed to confirm these observations.
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.