ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Dental and skeletal factors potentially influencing second molar mesialization following first permanent molar extraction: A 5-year follow-up study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate dental and skeletal factors influencing spontaneous space closure and axial angulation of the second molar (P2M) and second premolar (SP) five years after permanent first molar (P1M) extraction. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 79 patients (mean age 9.5 ± 1.6 years) with unilateral P1M extraction. Panoramic radiographs were analyzed at T1 (pre-extraction) and T2 (5-year follow-up). P2M developmental stages (Demirjian), initial vertical positions, and baseline skeletal parameters (gonial angle, condylar inclination, and antegonial notch angle) were assessed on T1 panoramic radiographs. Angulation changes were compared between the extraction and the non-extraction control sides.
resultsComplete space-closure status did not differ significantly among Demirjian developmental stages (p > 0.05). In the maxilla, P2M angulation changes differed significantly among developmental timing groups (p = 0.018). In the mandible, SP showed significant distal tipping within all developmental groups (p < 0.05), whereas no significant SP angulation change was observed in the maxilla. A significant positive correlation was identified between baseline antegonial notch angle and complete space closure (p = 0.011). Compared with the contralateral non-extraction side, the extraction side showed significant angular differences for both P2M and SP.
conclusionsThe P2M developmental stage alone appeared insufficient for explaining complete space closure following unilateral P1M extraction. Post-extraction angular changes differed according to jaw and tooth type, and baseline antegonial notch angle showed an exploratory association with complete space closure. These findings suggest that selected panoramic observations may provide supplementary information during case assessment, but should not be interpreted as standalone predictive criteria. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In children requiring P1M extraction, P2M developmental stage should not be used as the sole criterion for estimating spontaneous space closure. Expected post-extraction tipping patterns and selected panoramic findings, particularly the antegonial notch angle, may provide supplementary information during case assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42461432What 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.