ArticleBritish dental journal2015
Managing caries: the need to close the gap between the evidence base and current practice.
Article in British dental journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Best-practice prevention alone or with conventional or biological caries management for 3- to 7-year-olds: the FiCTION three-arm RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- Management of deep caries.British dental journal · 2026Review
- Assessment of Knowledge, Attitude, and Teaching of the Hall Technique Among Pediatric Dentistry Faculty in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- RNA sequencing reveals key factors modulating TNFα-stimulated odontoblast-like differentiation of dental pulp stem cells.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Gene expression profiles identify key factors in inflammatory odontoblastic dental pulp stem cell differentiation via TNFα/C5L2.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- 'Feeling more like a mechanic' - A qualitative study on experiences of caries prevention to patients with recurrent cavities among experienced dentists.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2024Article
- Five-year survival of class II restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite: a retrospective cohort study.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Article
- Observational
- COVID-19 as an opportunity for minimally-invasive dentistry: a national cross-sectional survey.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- Knowledge and opinions of French dental students related to caries risk assessment and dental sealants (preventive and therapeutic).Odontology · 2021Article
- Minimum intervention dentistry in the US: an update from a cariology perspective.British dental journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Underpinned by a changing knowledge of the aetiology of caries and its sequelae, and assisted by established and advancing dental materials, there is growing evidence supporting less invasive management of dental caries based on the principles of minimal intervention dentistry. This narrative review assesses both the evidence and the adoption of less invasive caries management strategies and describes ways in which the gap between evidence and practice might be overcome. While there is increasing data supporting less invasive management of carious lesions, these are not standard in most dental practices worldwide. Usually, clinical studies focused on efficacy as outcome, and did not take into consideration the views and priorities of other stakeholders, such as primary care dentists, educators, patients and those financing services. Involving these stakeholders into study design and demonstrating the broader advantages of new management strategies might improve translation of research into practice. In theory, clinical dentists can rely on a growing evidence in cariology regarding less invasive management options. In practice, further factors seem to impede adoption of these strategies. Future research should address these factors by involving major stakeholders and investigating their prioritised outcomes to narrow or close the evidence gap.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26564354What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.