Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL), Pain and Side Effects in Adults Undergoing Different Orthodontic Treatment Modalities: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The present study aimed to identify the differences between experiences, in terms of oral health-related quality of life, pain, side effects and/or other complications, of adults undergoing orthodontic treatment using removable aligners and fixed labial or lingual appliances. Methods: The review was registered with PROSPERO, and a comprehensive electronic search was undertaken without language or date restrictions. Randomised and non-randomised trials and prospective cohort and cross-sectional studies along with case series were included. The Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias 2 Tool, Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and The Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies—of Interventions tools were used to assess quality. Data were grouped in terms of oral health-related quality of life, pain side effects and/or other complications. Results: Data from 35 studies were included; 9 were eligible for meta-analysis. Thus 2611 participants were included related to removable aligners (n = 513), fixed labial (n = 1816) and lingual (n = 218) appliances or a combination (n = 64) of appliances. The standardised mean differences in visual analogue scale pain reports between 24 h and 7 days were −10.02 (95% CI: −11.13, −8.91) for aligners and −6.40 (95%CI: −10.42, −2.38) for labial appliances (p = 0.09). There was a significant improvement in dental self-confidence following fixed labial appliance treatment (p = 0.001). Conclusions: No difference was detected in short-term pain with aligners and labial appliances. Aligners may have less impact on oral health-related quality of life measures compared to labial appliances. Lingual appliances have a persistent impact on speech, despite some adaptability. Any deterioration in oral health-related quality of life measures during treatment appears temporary. Further randomised trials using validated assessment tools and comparing aligners and labial and lingual appliances are required.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.026 | 0.048 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".