Table 4 Summary of findings table according to the GRADE approach
Outcomes (study design) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of evidence (GRADE) | Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
Maxillary anchorage loss (randomised trials) | 116 (3 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 due to risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision | 1.8 lower (2.63 to 0.96 lower) |
Mandibular anchorage loss (randomised trials) | 52 (2 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 due to risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision | 1.48 lower (2.02 to 0.95 lower) |
Maxillary anchorage loss (observational studies) | 152 (4 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 due to risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision | 1.39 lower (1.89 to 0.88 lower) |
Mandibular anchorage loss (observational studies) | 88 (3 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 due to risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision | 1.76 lower (2.41 to 1.1 lower) |
Maxillary canine retraction (randomised trials) | 56 (2 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 due to risk of bias, imprecision | 0.31 lower (0.72 lower to 0.09 higher) |
Mandibular canine retraction (randomised trials) | 52 (2 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 due to risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision | 0.14 lower (0.28 lower to 0.57 higher) |
Maxillary canine retraction (observational studies) | 58 (2 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 due to risk of bias, imprecision | 0.51 lower (0.86 to 0.16 lower) |
Mandibular canine retraction (observational studies) | 54 (2 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW1 due to risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision | 0.31 lower (0.6 to 0.03 lower) |