Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 844

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 access
Rossini, Gabriele, Parrini, Simone, Castroflorio, Tommaso, Deregibus, Andrea, Debernardi, Cesare L.·2015·The Angle Orthodontist

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2319/061614-436.1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 844

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.