Observational studyPeerJ2026
Prevalence and morphology of lingual canals in mandibular incisors: a cone-beam computed tomography-based cross-sectional study.
Observational study in PeerJ, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate identification of root canal anatomy is essential for endodontic success, particularly in mandibular incisors, where additional canals such as the lingual canal are frequently missed using conventional diagnostic methods. In this context, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) has emerged as a valuable tool for detecting complex anatomical variations. Therefore, this study evaluated the prevalence, distribution, and spatial characteristics of the lingual canal using CBCT, as well as its association with demographic factors. Methods: This observational, cross-sectional, retrospective study included CBCT scans from 342 patients (1,368 mandibular incisors). Images were acquired using standardized parameters (field of view: 10 × 5 cm; voxel size/slice thickness: 0.5 mm; interval: 1/1) and analyzed by a single previously trained examiner. Intra-rater reliability was assessed using test-retest analysis in 30% of the sample, demonstrating excellent agreement (ICC = 0.95). Associations between the presence of the lingual canal and demographic variables were evaluated using chi-square tests and odds ratios, while spatial characteristics were assessed using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), adopting a significance level of Results: The overall prevalence of the lingual canal was 8.84%. It was significantly more frequent in males than females (
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.