ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2026
Morphometric assessment of the greater palatine foramen in a Saudi patient sample: a CBCT study.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 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
The greater palatine foramen (GPF) is a critical anatomical landmark for palatal nerve block anesthesia, periodontal surgery, and soft tissue graft harvesting. Population-specific morphometric data are needed for safe clinical practice. However, standardized CBCT-based GPF morphometric data with reliability analysis are lacking for the Saudi population. This retrospective cross-sectional study evaluated 68 CBCT scans of adult Saudi patients (18-65 years) from King Saud Dental University Hospital. Three primary variables were measured using Planmeca Romexis software: the distance from the GPF to the midline maxillary suture (GPF-MMS), the anteroposterior (AP) diameter, and the lateromedial (LM) diameter. Data were analyzed using R (version 4.5.3). Descriptive statistics, normality testing, and sex-based comparisons were performed. The mean GPF-MMS distance was 15.25 ± 1.26 mm (95% CI: 14.95-15.56). The mean AP diameter was 5.34 ± 0.97 mm (95% CI: 5.11-5.58), and the mean LM diameter was 2.43 ± 0.54 mm (95% CI: 2.30-2.56). All three measurements were significantly larger in males than females (GPF-MMS: p=0.003, d=0.820; AP: p=0.006, d=0.742; LM: p=0.005, r=0.341). Inter-rater reliability was excellent for GPF-MMS (ICC=0.920) and good for AP and LM diameters (ICC=0.808 and 0.873, respectively). GPF-MMS distance, AP diameter, and LM diameter in Saudi adults were 15.25 mm, 5.34 mm, and 2.43 mm, respectively. Males had significantly larger measurements across all three variables. Population-specific and sex-adjusted reference values should be applied when planning palatal nerve block anesthesia and soft tissue graft harvesting in Saudi patients.
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.