Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25355774›Full record

Trial reportJournal of dental research2015

Understanding treatment effect mechanisms of the CAMBRA randomized trial in reducing caries increment.

J Cheng, B W Chaffee, N F Cheng, S A Gansky, J D B Featherstone

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of dental research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Long-term scopolamine treatment and dental caries.Clinical oral investigations · 2019
    Article
  10. Mediation analysis for count and zero-inflated count data.Statistical methods in medical research · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

J ChengUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA jing.cheng@ucsf.edu.
B W ChaffeeUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
N F ChengUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
S A GanskyUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
J D B FeatherstoneUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

Statistics and Data Coordinating CenterU54DE019285 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GANSKY, STUART A · 2008 to 2014
$24.9M
CARIES MANAGEMENT BY RISK ASSESSMENTR01DE012455 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO · PI FEATHERSTONE, JOHN D · 1998 to 2001
$545k
NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE 012455NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE012455NIDCR NIH HHS U54 DE 019285NIDCR NIH HHS U54 DE019285
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Caries Management By Risk Assessment (CAMBRA) randomized controlled trial showed that an intervention featuring combined antibacterial and fluoride therapy significantly reduced bacterial load and suggested reduced caries increment in adults with 1 to 7 baseline cavitated teeth. While trial results speak to the overall effectiveness of an intervention, insight can be gained from understanding the mechanism by which an intervention acts on putative intermediate variables (mediators) to affect outcomes. This study conducted mediation analyses on 109 participants who completed the trial to understand whether the intervention reduced caries increment through its action on potential mediators (oral bacterial load, fluoride levels, and overall caries risk based on the composite of bacterial challenge and salivary fluoride) between the intervention and dental outcomes. The primary outcome was the increment from baseline in decayed, missing, and filled permanent surfaces (ΔDMFS) 24 mo after completing restorations for baseline cavitated lesions. Analyses adjusted for baseline overall risk, bacterial challenge, and fluoride values under a potential outcome framework using generalized linear models. Overall, the CAMBRA intervention was suggestive in reducing the 24-mo DMFS increment (reduction in ΔDMFS: -0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -2.01 to 0.08; P = 0.07); the intervention significantly reduced the 12-mo overall risk (reduction in overall risk: -19%; 95% CI, -7 to -41%;], P = 0.005). Individual mediators, salivary log10 mutans streptococci, log10 lactobacilli, and fluoride level, did not represent statistically significant pathways alone through which the intervention effect was transmitted. However, 36% of the intervention effect on 24-mo DMFS increment was through a mediation effect on 12-mo overall risk (P = 0.03). These findings suggest a greater intervention effect carried through the combined action on multiple aspects of the caries process rather than through any single factor. In addition, a substantial portion of the total effect of the CAMBRA intervention may have operated through unanticipated or unmeasured pathways not included among the potential mediators studied.

Indexed as

AdultAnti-Infective Agents, LocalBacterial LoadCariostatic AgentsChlorhexidineDental CariesDMF IndexFemaleFluoridesFollow-Up StudiesHumansLactobacillusLinear ModelsMaleRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsAnti-Infective Agents, LocalCariostatic AgentsChlorhexidineFluoridescaries managementcaries risklactobacillusmediation analysissalivary fluorideStreptococcus mutans

Identifiers

PMID25355774
PMCPMC4270809
OpenAlexW2045715921

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.