Comparison of Movement of the Upper Dentition According to Anchorage Method: Orthodontic Mini-Implant versus Conventional Anchorage Reinforcement in Class I Malocclusion.

Lee AY, Kim YH

DOI: 10.5402/2011/321206
Published: 2011
Container: ISRN dentistry
Publisher: Not recorded
Open access: yes

Credibility signals

serious concern Score 10/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

cautionDOI registered: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility. Source: DOAJ; license: CC0
not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
serious concernRetraction Watch retraction: 1 retraction notice matched this DOI. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
supportingOpen access status: Normalized open-access status: open. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.5402/2011/321206,
  title = {Comparison of Movement of the Upper Dentition According to Anchorage Method: Orthodontic Mini-Implant versus Conventional Anchorage Reinforcement in Class I Malocclusion.},
  author = {Lee AY and Kim YH},
  year = {2011},
  journal = {ISRN dentistry},
  doi = {10.5402/2011/321206},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.5402/2011/321206}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Comparison of Movement of the Upper Dentition According to Anchorage Method: Orthodontic Mini-Implant versus Conventional Anchorage Reinforcement in Class I Malocclusion.
AU  - Lee AY
AU  - Kim YH
PY  - 2011
JO  - ISRN dentistry
DO  - 10.5402/2011/321206
UR  - https://doi.org/10.5402/2011/321206
ER  -

APA

AY, L., & YH, K. (2011). Comparison of Movement of the Upper Dentition According to Anchorage Method: Orthodontic Mini-Implant versus Conventional Anchorage Reinforcement in Class I Malocclusion.. ISRN dentistry. https://doi.org/10.5402/2011/321206

Source records

pubmed · retrieved 2026-11-10T13:39:05.649Z