Question · asked by 1 review
Lacebacks with fixed appliances vs Fixed appliances: Size of the lower jaw (arch length)
- Population
- Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
- Intervention
- Lacebacks with fixed appliances
- Comparison
- Fixed appliances
- Outcome
- Size of the lower jaw (arch length)
Lacebacks with fixed appliances showed no clear difference in size of the lower jaw (arch length) compared with fixed appliances only (control); GRADE not reported.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Lacebacks with fixed appliances vs Fixed appliances only (control) Size of the lower jaw (arch length) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth · 6 months Lacebacks with fixed appliances showed no clear difference in size of the lower jaw (arch length) compared with fixed appliances only (control); GRADE not reported. Orthodontic treatment for crowded teeth in children (2021) · Cochrane All outcomes | MD 0.83 [-6.41, 8.07] | 1 study · 62 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Orthodontic treatment for crowded teeth in children 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2021-01 | Not listed | Not 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.