evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

27 questions · 27 findings · 2 reviews · Orthodontics

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 1 · 3.7%GRADE not reported 23 · 85.2%Very low 0 · 0%Low 3 · 11.1%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) vs Facemask only

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

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) showed no clear difference in ANB compared with facemask only (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) vs Modified tandem appliance

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

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) led to higher overjet compared with modified tandem appliance; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) vs Mini maxillary protractor

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

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) led to lower ANB compared with mini maxillary protractor; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Reverse Twin Block with lip pads and rapid maxillary expander (RME) vs no intervention

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

Reverse Twin Block with lip pads and rapid maxillary expander (RME) led to higher ANB compared with untreated control (no treatment); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Reverse Twin Block with lip pads and rapid maxillary expander (RME) vs no intervention

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

Reverse Twin Block with lip pads and rapid maxillary expander (RME) led to higher wits appraisal compared with untreated control (no treatment); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Two-band palatal expander with slow expansion vs Two-band palatal expander with rapid expansion

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    7 months after start of treatment
    Martina 2012: slow 6.3 mm (SD 2.1) vs rapid 5.7 mm (SD 1.6); reported as no statistically significant difference in text (PUB2 MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.85 to 2.05); Table 1 lists P<0.001 (discrepant)
    1 study · 26 participants
    GRADE not reported