MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410720976 · doi:10.1186/s40510-025-00564-4

Precision wings treating skeletal class II in growing patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4410720976 on OpenAlex
Paulo Mecenas, Renata Travassos da Rosa Moreira Bastos, Nathália Carolina Fernandes Fagundes, David Normando

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Orthodontics · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMalocclusionMeta-analysisConfidence intervalDentistryObservational studyOrthodonticsSagittal planeInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Skeletal Class II malocclusion, often associated with mandibular deficiency, is commonly treated with functional appliances. Precision Wings are a functional appliance that provides an alternative approach by combining mandibular advancement with dental alignment. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of Precision Wings in treating skeletal Class II malocclusion in growing patients. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies assessing the correction of skeletal Class II malocclusion in growing patients treated with Precision Wings were selected according to the PICOS strategy. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. INFORMATION SOURCES: Unrestricted electronic searches were conducted across seven databases up to February 2025. RISK OF BIAS AND SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess the risk of bias (RoB) in non-randomized studies. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed, and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Seven studies were included, and data were extracted. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. The findings suggest that Precision Wings may be effective in treating skeletal Class II malocclusion in growing patients through both dental and skeletal changes. Regarding skeletal effects, sagittal changes were limited to the mandible and were of small magnitude, with a reduction in ANB° (MD = -0.81; 95% CI: -1.04 to -0.58; p < 0.001) occurring exclusively due to an increase in SNB° (MD = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.98; p = 0.01), while no significant changes were observed in SNA° (MD = -0.02; 95% CI: -0.42 to 0.38; p = 0.91). The included studies did not report significant vertical effects. Meta-analyses comparing Precision Wings with other functional appliances were not feasible due to the small number of studies evaluating each comparison and the substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity across the included studies. CONCLUSION: Although the available scientific evidence on this topic is limited, treatment with Precision Wings appears to offer minimal clinical improvement in mandibular growth for the correction of skeletal Class II malocclusion. To obtain more conclusive findings, future research should prioritize well-structured randomized clinical trials with standardized treatment protocols, extended follow-ups, and consistent cephalometric assessment methods.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it