↓ Skip to main content

Dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes in class II subdivision treatment with asymmetric extraction protocols

Overview of attention for article published in Progress in Orthodontics, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes in class II subdivision treatment with asymmetric extraction protocols
Published in
Progress in Orthodontics, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40510-017-0193-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guilherme Janson, Eduardo Beaton Lenza, Rodolfo Francisco, Aron Aliaga-Del Castillo, Daniela Garib, Marcos Augusto Lenza

Abstract

This study cephalometrically compared the dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes consequent to one and three-premolar extraction protocols of class II subdivision malocclusion treatment. A sample of 126 lateral cephalometric radiographs from 63 patients was selected and divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of 31 type 1 class II subdivision malocclusion patients treated with asymmetric extractions of two maxillary premolars and one mandibular premolar on the class I side, with an initial mean age of 13.58 years. Group 2 consisted of 32 type 2 class II subdivision malocclusion patients treated with asymmetric extraction of one maxillary first premolar on the class II side, with an initial mean age of 13.98 years. t test was used for intergroup comparison at the pre- and posttreatment stages and to compare the treatment changes. Group 1 had greater maxillomandibular sagittal discrepancy reduction and greater maxillary first molar extrusion. Group 2 had mandibular incisor labial inclination and protrusion, and group 1 had mandibular incisor lingual inclination and retraction. Maxillary molar asymmetry increased in group 2, while mandibular molar asymmetry increased in group 1. The treatment changes produced by these two class II subdivision protocols are different to adequately satisfy the different needs for types 1 and 2 class II subdivision malocclusions.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 19%
Student > Postgraduate 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 3 5%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 19 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 53%
Unspecified 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 21 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 December 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Progress in Orthodontics
#220
of 255 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#385,339
of 445,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Progress in Orthodontics
#12
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 255 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 445,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.