ArticleBMC oral health2026
Association between third molar agenesis and sagittal skeletal discrepancies in an orthodontic patient population.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have reported differences in the prevalence of tooth agenesis according to sagittal skeletal discrepancies, while third molars have often not been considered. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association between third molar agenesis and sagittal skeletal discrepancies.
methodsThis cross-sectional study comprised 484 orthodontic patients. Pre-orthodontic lateral cephalometric radiographs were digitally analyzed using OnyxCeph³. SNA, SNB, and ANB angles were determined, and the skeletal classification based on ANB was performed as Class I, Class II, and Class III. In addition, sagittal jaw positions were classified as retrognathic, orthognathic, or prognathic. Third molar agenesis was evaluated on panoramic radiographs. The control group consisted exclusively of individuals with a complete permanent dentition of 32 teeth. Statistical analysis was performed at α = 0.05.
resultsA total 244 females and 240 males were included: 216 patients had skeletal Class I malocclusion, 201 had skeletal Class II malocclusion, and 67 had skeletal Class III malocclusion. A total of 117 patients had third molar agenesis. Patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion showed a higher prevalence of third molar agenesis (total) (p = 0.0086) and a higher prevalence of maxillary third molar agenesis (p = 0.0003). The number of missing third molars ranged from 1 to 4, and a statistically significant difference was observed, with patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion showing a higher number of missing third molars compared with patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion (p = 0.0309) and skeletal Class I malocclusion (p = 0.0432). Logistic regression analysis was performed, in which gender and age were included in the model as covariates showed that Skeletal class III malocclusion remained associated with third molar agenesis (p < 0.05).
conclusionThird molar agenesis was significantly more prevalent in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion.
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.