Question · asked by 1 review

Facemask vs no intervention: Adverse effects (temporomandibular joint signs and symptoms)

Population
Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)
Intervention
Facemask
Comparison
no intervention
Outcome
Adverse effects (temporomandibular joint signs and symptoms)

What each review found

Current versions only
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 2 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Facemask vs Untreated control (no treatment)
Adverse effects (temporomandibular joint signs and symptoms) · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) · End of treatment / follow-up
Orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) in children (2024) · Cochrane All outcomes
Mandall 2010: no statistical analysis of TMJ signs/symptoms due to low prevalence; at 6-year follow-up reported no adverse effects from facemask.1 study · 69 participantsGRADE not reported
Facemask vs Untreated control (no treatment)
Adverse effects (temporomandibular joint signs and symptoms) · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) · End of treatment / follow-up
Orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) in children (2013) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD003451.PUB2, superseded
Mandall 2010: TMJ signs and symptoms recorded; no statistical analysis carried out because of low prevalence at all time points.1 study · 69 participantsGRADE not reported

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) in children
2024 · Cochrane All outcomes
2023-01Not listedNot assessed
How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.