English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

When they are seeking possible relations of causality, mightn’t it be possible that clinicians sometimes let themselves be deceived by the fallacy Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc (with this, therefore because of this)? After reading the exchanges that periodically enliven publications devoted to the relationship between extractions and ALD, orthodontics and idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents, extractions and OSA, etc., it seems appropriate to ask this question. In fact, some authors continue to categorically affirm the existence of a causal link between these factors and these pathologies, in spite of all the convincing data that presently indicates an absence of any causal relationship. The Latin phrase Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc (with this, therefore because of this) is a type of fallacious reasoning. It consists in claiming that if two events are correlated, the relationship is causal in nature. This error is particularly seductive since we have a natural tendency to associate correlation and causality, rather than to look for the presence of other factors, that might exclude the causal link. DOI: 10.1051/odfen/2014026 J Dentofacial Anom Orthod 2014;17:401 RODF / EDP Sciences

Orthodontics, authors’ opinions and scientific facts:Cum hoc ergo propter hoc?