evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

4 questions · 4 findings · 1 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 3 · 75%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 1 · 25%High 0 · 0%

Tandem traction bow appliance vs no intervention

Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Tandem traction bow appliance led to higher overjet compared with untreated control (no treatment); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Bone-anchored intermaxillary traction (BAIMT) vs Removable mandibular retractor (RMR)

Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Bone-anchored intermaxillary traction (BAIMT) led to higher overjet compared with removable mandibular retractor (RMR); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic removable traction appliance (ORTA) vs no intervention

Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Orthodontic removable traction appliance (ORTA) led to higher overjet compared with untreated control (no treatment); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Non-surgical orthodontic treatment (any: facemask, chin cup, tandem traction bow, mandibular headgear, ORTA, reverse Twin Block, Reverse Forsus) vs no treatment

Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Non-surgical orthodontic treatment (any: facemask, chin cup, tandem… probably leads to higher overjet compared with no treatment (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review