Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24722120›Full record

ArticleBritish dental journal2014

International benchmarking of hospitalisations for impacted teeth: a 10-year retrospective study from the United Kingdom, France and Australia.

A A Anjrini, E Kruger, M Tennant

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British dental journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A A AnjriniInternational Research Collaborative - Oral Health and Equity, Department of Anatomy, Physiology and Human Biology, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Hwy Nedlands, 6009 Australia.
E KrugerInternational Research Collaborative - Oral Health and Equity, Department of Anatomy, Physiology and Human Biology, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Hwy Nedlands, 6009 Australia.
M TennantInternational Research Collaborative - Oral Health and Equity, Department of Anatomy, Physiology and Human Biology, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Hwy Nedlands, 6009 Australia.
University of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe United Kingdom and its national healthcare system represent a unique comparison for many other developed countries (such as Australia and France), as the practice of prophylactic removal of third molars in the United Kingdom has been discouraged for nearly two decades, with clear guidelines issued by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in 2000 to limit third molar removal to only pathological situations. No such guidelines exist in Australia or France. The healthcare systems in England, France and Australia all use the International Classification of Disease (ICD) coding system for diagnostic categorising of all admissions to hospitals.

aimThis study rested upon the opportunity of a universal coding system and semi-open access data to complete the first comparative study on an international scale of hospitalisations for removal of impacted teeth (between 99/00 and 08/09).

resultsOur international comparison revealed significant differences in rates of admission, with England having rates approximately five times less than France, and seven times less than Australia. Those results could be explained by the implementation of guidelines in the United Kingdom, and the absence of similar guidelines in France and Australia.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingClinical CodingFranceHospitalizationHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicRetrospective StudiesSurgery, OralTooth, ImpactedUnited KingdomWestern Australia

Identifiers

PMID24722120
OpenAlexW1978504240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.