SynthesisThe Angle orthodontist2025
Predictability of mesiodistal movement of upper and lower molars with clear aligners: a systematic review.
Synthesis in The Angle orthodontist, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To analyze and summarize the current scientific evidence regarding the clinical predictability of mesiodistal movements of upper and lower molars in patients treated with clear aligners without auxiliary aid. Materials and Methods: This review followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022357639). Databases were searched up to September 2024. Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers, risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool, and certainty of evidence was evaluated qualitatively using the GRADE tool. Results: 919 articles were identified, and six prospective and retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria, predominantly using the Invisalign system. Upper molar predictability was 61.1 ± 9.1% for movements ranging from 0.45 to 3.2 mm. Lower molar distalization showed lower predictability and molar mesial movement had median predictability rates of 85.6 ± 1.1%. Moderate to serious risk of bias and very low quality of evidence was found. Conclusions: Upper molar distalization using clear aligners appears to be predictable for distalization from 1.5 to 3.2 mm. Anchorage reinforcement or overcorrection should be considered when planning mesiodistal movements. Standardization of the measurement method is necessary to improve efficacy of these systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.