Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42479289›Full record

Trial reportProgress in orthodontics2026

Reliability and agreement of CBCT-based alveolar bone assessments for follow-up studies on adolescent orthodontic patients using multiplanar reconstruction and various CBCT units.

Linda Bokander Matilainen, Kristina Johansson, Liselotte Paulsson, Helena Christell

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Progress in orthodontics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05664282 (Orthodontic Treatment in Adolescents With Crowding and Displaced Teeth From the Clinical, the Patients' and Economic Perspectives), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05664282 naactive not recruitingnot on this map

Orthodontic Treatment in Adolescents With Crowding and Displaced Teeth From the Clinical, the Patients' and Economic Perspectives

TypeinterventionalSponsorMalmö UniversityRan2016 to 2027Enrolled131ConditionsCrowding, Tooth, OrthodonticArmsDamon self-ligating brackets, Victory self-ligating brackets
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Linda Bokander MatilainenDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmo, Sweden. linda.bokander-matilainen@mau.se.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6558-8340
Kristina JohanssonDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmo, Sweden.
Liselotte PaulssonDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmo, Sweden.
Helena ChristellDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmo, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCBCT is increasingly used to assess alveolar bone in orthodontic patients; however, reliability and agreement for detecting changes in follow-up assessments remain uncertain. This study evaluated the reliability and agreement of linear marginal alveolar bone level measurements, and agreement in detecting fenestrations in CBCT volumes acquired from different units before and after active orthodontic treatment in adolescents, using a multiplanar reconstruction-based measurement protocol for follow-up studies.

methodsCBCT volumes (n = 96) from 48 adolescents (mean age 14.4 years) enrolled in a randomised controlled trial on fixed-appliance treatment for crowding were acquired at baseline and posttreatment using five distinct CBCT units after objective image-quality testing. Buccal and lingual bone levels at the central incisors, canines, and second premolars were measured from the cementoenamel junction to the alveolar crest according to a predefined protocol. Three independent raters performed linear measurements, two assessed fenestrations greater than 2.2 mm, and one repeated all measurements. Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients. Agreement for the bone level measurements was assessed using Dahlberg's formula and visualised with Bland-Altman plots. Minimal detectable change was calculated per site, and percentage agreement was used for fenestration detection.

resultsIntrarater reliability ranged from moderate to excellent at both time points. Dahlberg's random errors ranged from 0.19 to 0.71 mm at baseline, and 0.19 to 1.07 mm posttreatment. Interrater reliability ranged from poor to good, with random errors ranging from 0.23 to 2.54 mm. Bland-Altman plots revealed minor systematic bias for the intrarater measurements. Minimal detectable changes demonstrated the ability to detect clinically relevant alveolar bone changes. Agreement for fenestration detection was high (intrarater ≥ 81%, interrater ≥ 74%).

conclusionThe protocol demonstrated intrarater reliability and agreement suitable for assessing clinically relevant changes in marginal bone levels and for detecting fenestrations in follow-up studies of adolescents treated orthodontically for crowding without extraction. However, the results were influenced by rater variability and imaging conditions and were most reliable when the assessments were performed by the same rater. Assessment of reliability and agreement under study-specific conditions is recommended. The findings highlight both the potential and methodological challenges of CBCT-based alveolar bone assessments, offering implications for clinical practice and future research in this field.

trial registrationCROWDIT: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05664282).

Indexed as

Alveolar ProcessCone-Beam Computed TomographyAdolescentFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMalocclusionReproducibility of ResultsAgreementAlveolar boneCone-beam computed tomographyFenestrationOrthodontic treatmentReliability

Identifiers

PMID42479289
PMCPMC13388868

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.