Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26265916›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2015

The Impact of Subject Age, Gender, and Arch Length on Attitudes of Syrian Dentists towards Shortened Dental Arches.

Mohammad Zakaria Nassani, Tammam Ibrahim Al-Nahhal, Omar Kujan, Bassel Tarakji, Elizabeth Jane Kay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of dentistry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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.

Mohammad Zakaria NassaniRestorative Dental Sciences Department, Al-Farabi Colleges, P.O. Box 85184, Riyadh 11691, Saudi Arabia.
Tammam Ibrahim Al-NahhalDepartment of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Aleppo, Aleppo, Syria.
Omar KujanOral and Maxillofacial Sciences Department, Al-Farabi Colleges, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Bassel TarakjiOral and Maxillofacial Sciences Department, Al-Farabi Colleges, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Elizabeth Jane KayPeninsula School of Dentistry, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective. This study aimed to investigate the impact of subject age, gender, and arch length on dentists' attitudes towards unrestored shortened dental arches. Materials and Methods. 93 Syrian dentists were interviewed and presented with 24 scenarios for male and female subjects of different ages and shortened dental arches of varying length. Participants were asked to indicate on a standardized visual analogue scale how they would value the health of the mouth if the posterior space was left unrestored. Results. A value of 0.0 represented the worst possible health state for a mouth and 1.0 represented the best. The highest mean value (0.73) was assigned to a shortened dental arch with missing second molar teeth in the mouth of a 70-year-old subject. A 35-year-old female subject with an extremely shortened dental arch (all molar and premolar teeth are missing) attracted the lowest mean value (0.26). The statistical analysis indicated a significant decrease in the value placed on unrestored shortened dental arches as the number of remaining teeth decreased (p < 0.008). While subject gender had almost no impact on dentists' attitudes towards shortened dental arches, the scenarios for the older shortened dental arch subjects attracted significantly higher values compared to the scenarios for the younger subjects (p < 0.017). Conclusion. Subject age and arch length affect dentists' attitudes towards shortened dental arches, but subject gender does not.

Identifiers

PMID26265916
PMCPMC4523669

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.