ArticleBMC oral health2026
Prevalence and patterns of congenital tooth agenesis in children: a mixed-method study on parental awareness.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCongenital tooth agenesis is one of the most common developmental dental anomalies in children and may lead to functional, esthetic, and psychosocial consequences if not diagnosed and managed early. While its prevalence has been widely investigated, data regarding parental awareness and communication following diagnosis remain limited.
methodsThis mixed-method study included a retrospective radiographic evaluation and a prospective telephone survey. Panoramic radiographs of 3,550 children aged 7-15 years who attended a university pediatric dentistry clinic between 2020 and 2025 were retrospectively assessed to determine the prevalence and patterns of permanent tooth agenesis, excluding third molars. Children diagnosed with agenesis were subsequently included in a prospective telephone survey to evaluate parental awareness and prior clinical communication. Descriptive statistics and appropriate non-parametric tests were used for data analysis.
resultsPermanent tooth agenesis was identified in 155 children, resulting in an overall prevalence of 4.4%. Hypodontia accounted for 4.2% of cases, while oligodontia was observed in 0.2%. The mandibular second premolars were the most frequently missing teeth, followed by the maxillary lateral incisors. Agenesis was significantly more common in the mandible than in the maxilla (p = 0.009). Although no significant sex difference was observed in overall agenesis prevalence, maxillary lateral incisor agenesis was significantly more frequent in females (unadjusted OR = 7.5; 95% CI: 3.61-15.57; p < 0.001). Among the 127 families who participated in the telephone survey, 63% reported having been previously informed about their child's condition; however, many described the information as insufficient. After receiving additional explanation during the survey, 83.5% of families requested further clinical evaluation or follow-up.
conclusionsThe prevalence and distribution patterns of tooth agenesis observed in this pediatric population are consistent with existing literature. However, parental awareness regarding the diagnosis remains suboptimal. These findings highlight the importance of not only accurate radiographic diagnosis but also structured and effective communication with families to facilitate early intervention and long-term management.
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.