2011
DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2011.0083
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The validity and reliability of mixed-dentition analysis methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
12
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
12
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Due to this reason, some hesitate to recommend BU approach, but not that it can/cannot predict the tooth size. 9 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Due to this reason, some hesitate to recommend BU approach, but not that it can/cannot predict the tooth size. 9 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An appropriate mixed dentition space analysis (MDS) helps to reduce the severity of a developing malocclusion or even eliminate it, if timely interceptive treatment is initiated (Moyers, 1988;Kuswandari et al, 2006). An accurate forecast of the size of unerupted teeth versus the available space helps orthodontists to make correct decisions regarding treatment options for the patient, whether to involve serial extraction, eruption guidance, space management, space regaining or just periodic observation of the patient (Hukaba, 1964;Smith et al, 1979;Bishara and Jakobsen, 1998;Lee-Chan et al, 1998;Luu et al, 2011). Inappropriate and invalid MDS can lead to extraction decisions, which negatively alters a patient's soft tissue facial profile (Durgekar and Naik, 2009), dental aesthetics and functional occlusion.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[ 13 ] The literature review showed that of all the three methods applied in mixed dentition analysis, Tanaka-Johnston's is widely used. [ 14 ] Young age group (12–15 years) was chosen for measurement to minimize the alteration of the mesiodistal tooth dimensions because of attrition, restoration, or caries.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%