Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26237935›Full record

ArticleTexas dental journal2015

Methods dentists use to diagnose primary caries lesions prior to restorative treatment: Findings from The Dental PBRN.

Brad J D Rindal, Valeria V Gordan, Mark S Litaker, James D Bader, Jeffrey L Fellows, Vibeke Qvist, Martha C Wallace-Dawson, Mary L Anderson, Gregg H Gilbert

Abstract read
PubMed
In one paragraph

Article in Texas dental journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 69% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Brad J D Rindal
Valeria V Gordan
Mark S Litaker
James D Bader
Jeffrey L Fellows
Vibeke Qvist
Martha C Wallace-Dawson
Mary L Anderson
Gregg H Gilbert

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo (1) quantify the diagnostic techniques used by Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) dentists before they decide to treat primary caries lesions surgically and (2) examine whether certain dentist, practice, and patient characteristics are associated with their use.

methodsA total of 228 DPBRN dentists recorded information on 5,676 consecutive restorations inserted due to primary caries lesions on 3,751 patients. Practitioner-investigators placed a mean of 24.9 (SD = 12.4) restorations. Lesions were categorized as posterior proximal, anterior proximal, posterior occiusal, posterior smooth, or anterior smooth. Techniques used to diagnose the lesion were categorized as clinical assessment, radiographs, and/or optical. Statistical analysis utilized generalized mixed-model ANOVA to account for the hierarchical structure of the data.

resultsBy lesion category, the diagnostic technique combinations used most frequently were clinical assessment plus radiographs for posterior proximal (47%), clinical assessment for anterior proximal (51%), clinical assessment for posterior occlusal (46%), clinical assessment for posterior smooth (77%), and clinical assessment for anterior smooth (80%). Diagnostic technique was significantly associated with lesion category after adjusting for clustering in dentists (p < 0.0001).

conclusionThese results--obtained during actual clinical procedures rather than from questionnaire-based hypothetical scenarios--quantified the diagnostic techniques most commonly used during the actual delivery of routine restorative care. Diagnostic technique varied by lesion category and with certain practice and patient characteristics.

Identifiers

PMID26237935
OpenAlexW2419145260

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.