ArticleMaedica2026
Prevalence of Mandibular Fractures among Maxillofacial Trauma in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Central Kerala, India - a Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Maedica, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The mandible is frequently involved in maxillofacial trauma because of its prominent and vulnerable anatomical position. The present study aimed to determine the distribution and aetiological factors of mandibular fractures among patients attending a tertiary care hospital in Central Kerala, India. Methods: This was an observational cross-sectional study which included 81 subjects with mandibular fractures out of 441 patients who had been screened for maxillofacial trauma. Data on demographic characteristics, aetiology of trauma, fracture site, alcohol consumption and road traffic accident characteristics were collected and analysed. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the data and chi-square tests assessed associations between aetiology or helmet use and fracture site. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Road traffic accidents were the predominant cause of mandibular fractures, accounting for 63 of 81 cases (77.8%), followed by accidental falls (9.9%), assault (6.2%), sports injuries (2.5%) and other causes (3.7%). The largest proportion of patients belonged to the 18-35-year age group (48.1%) and males constituted 97.5% of the analysed sample. Subcondylar and condylar fractures were the most common anatomical sites (39.5%), followed by parasymphysis and body fractures (38.3%). Among all RTA-related cases, helmet use was low (17.5%) and alcohol consumption before injury was reported by 39.5% of the study population. Helmet use was not significantly associated with fracture site (χ²=5.36, p=0.147), whereas aetiology was significantly associated with fracture site (χ²=48.15, p<0.001). Conclusion: Of the 441 cases of maxillofacial trauma screened in our centre during the study period, 81 mandibular fracture cases were analysed. Mandibular fractures were predominantly related to road traffic accidents, with young adult males forming the most affected group. Improved road safety enforcement, promotion of helmet usage and public awareness regarding alcohol-related injury risk are likely to reduce the burden and severity of mandibular trauma.
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.