ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2026
Trends in orthodontic treatment prevalence in Switzerland : A two-decade perspective.
Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOrthodontic treatment is increasingly common across Europe, but little is known about long-term population trends and social disparities in Switzerland, where orthodontic care is mainly privately financed.
objectiveTo examine temporal and sociodemographic patterns of orthodontic treatment in Switzerland between 2002 and 2022 and to identify associated inequalities.
methodsData came from three waves of the Swiss Health Survey (2002, 2012, 2022), a nationally representative cross-sectional study. The analytic sample comprised 53,019 individuals aged ≥ 15 years. The outcome was self-reported lifetime experience of wearing braces. Covariates included survey year, sex, age, education, language region, and urbanicity. Statistical evaluation included survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Interaction terms were used to test temporal changes.
resultsThe prevalence of orthodontic treatment rose from 23.0% in 2002 to 34.8% in 2022. Women were more likely than men to report treatment (aOR 1.59, 95% CI 1.51-1.68). Among adults (≥ 20 years), a strong educational gradient persisted: those with upper-secondary (aOR 2.82; 95% CI 2.43-3.28) or tertiary education (aOR 4.58; 95% CI 3.92-5.34) had significantly higher odds of treatment compared to those with compulsory education. Living in rural or intermediate regions was associated with lower odds compared to urban areas (aOR 0.93; 95% CI 0.88-0.99). Furthermore, residents of French-speaking (aOR 0.84; 95% CI 0.78-0.91) and Italian-speaking regions (aOR 0.79; 95% CI 0.71-0.89) showed lower treatment uptake than those in German-speaking Switzerland. Significant interactions of age and urbanicity with survey year reflect that prevalence increases over the past 20 years occurred particularly among younger individuals and those outside urban areas.
conclusionOrthodontic treatment in Switzerland has increased significantly, becoming a new norm for younger generations. However, this growth is not equitable; access remains heavily patterned by education, region, and urbanicity. In a predominantly privately financed system, these persistent disparities suggest that orthodontic care remains socially stratified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42886352What 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.