The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Efficacy of clear aligners in controlling orthodontic tooth movement: A systematic review
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To assess the scientific evidence related to the efficacy of clear aligner treatment (CAT) in controlling orthodontic tooth movement. Materials and Methods: PubMed, PMC, NLM, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, Google Scholar, and LILACs were searched from January 2000 to June 2014 to identify all peer-reviewed articles potentially relevant to the review. Methodological shortcomings were highlighted and the quality of the studies was ranked using the Cochrane Tool for Risk of Bias Assessment. Results: Eleven relevant articles were selected (two Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT), five prospective non-randomized, four retrospective non-randomized), and the risk of bias was moderate for six studies and unclear for the others. The amount of mean intrusion reported was 0.72 mm. Extrusion was the most difficult movement to control (30% of accuracy), followed by rotation. Upper molar distalization revealed the highest predictability (88%) when a bodily movement of at least 1.5 mm was prescribed. A decrease of the Little's Index (mandibular arch: 5 mm; maxillary arch: 4 mm) was observed in aligning arches. Conclusions: CAT aligns and levels the arches; it is effective in controlling anterior intrusion but not anterior extrusion; it is effective in controlling posterior buccolingual inclination but not anterior buccolingual inclination; it is effective in controlling upper molar bodily movements of about 1.5 mm; and it is not effective in controlling rotation of rounded teeth in particular. However, the results of this review should be interpreted with caution because of the number, quality, and heterogeneity of the studies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Cited by
Clear aligners in orthodontic treatment
Weir, T. (2017) · Australian Dental Journal · doi:10.1111/adj.12480 · Cited by 459
Sideri, S., Papageorgiou, S. N., & Eliades, T. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.01.003 · Cited by 388
Clinical effectiveness of Invisalign® orthodontic treatment: a systematic review
Papadimitriou, A., Mousoulea, S., Gkantidis, N., & Kloukos, D. (2018) · Progress in Orthodontics · doi:10.1186/s40510-018-0235-z · Cited by 366
Vásquez-Cárdenas, J., Zapata-Noreña, Ó., Carvajal-Flórez, Á., Barbosa-Liz, D. M., Giannakopoulos, N. N., & Faggion, C. M. (2019) · American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics · doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.05.009 · Cited by 34
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS IN DENTAL JOURNALS ON CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS
Jiang, C. M., Lee, G. H. M., Lo, E. C. M., Chu, C. H., & Wong, M. C. M. (2021) · Journal of Evidence Based Dental Practice · doi:10.1016/j.jebdp.2021.101621 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Rossini, G., Parrini, S., Castroflorio, T., Deregibus, A., & Debernardi, C. L.
- Venue
- The Angle Orthodontist
- Published
- 2015-09
- Volume
- 85
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 881-889
- ISSN
- 0003-3219 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2138142559
- Cited by
- 844
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Efficacy of clear aligners in controlling orthodontic tooth movement: A systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2319/061614-436.1
- The paper
- Rossini, G., Parrini, S., Castroflorio, T., Deregibus, A., & Debernardi, C. L. (2015). Efficacy of clear aligners in controlling orthodontic tooth movement: A systematic review. The Angle Orthodontist. https://doi.org/10.2319/061614-436.1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.