ArticleThe open dentistry journal2015
A Colorimetric Interdental Probe as a Standard Method to Evaluate Interdental Efficiency of Interdental Brush.
Article in The open dentistry journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of clinical efficacy and patient acceptance of interdental brush and silicone coated interdental pick: a randomized split-mouth, prospective clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2020Trial
- Calibrated interdental brushing for the prevention of periodontal pathogens infection in young adults - a randomized controlled clinical trial.Scientific reports · 2019Trial
- Effect of a Toothpaste/Mouthwash ContainingInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Trial
- Oral prophylaxis for the reduction of interdental dysbiosis-associated red complex pathogens during pregnancy: a randomized clinical trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Different Methods of Interdental Hygiene in Daily Practice Among Young Adults: Protocol for a Randomized, Single-Blind Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- History of Interdental Brushes: Origins, Developments, Perspectives.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2025Article
- Article
- Periodontal pathogens of the interdental microbiota in a 3 months pregnant population with an intact periodontium.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Effect of Oral Prophylactic Measures on the Occurrence of Pre-Eclampsia (OP-PE) in High-Risk Pregnant Women: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.Methods and protocols · 2021Article
- Mapping the Product Range of Interdental Brushes: Sizes, Shapes, and Forces.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2020Article
- Microbiota of interdental space of adolescents according to Risk of Caries: A cross-sectional study protocol.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2019Article
- Quantification of carious pathogens in the interdental microbiota of young caries-free adults.PloS one · 2017Article
- Access to Interdental Brushing in Periodontal Healthy Young Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.PloS one · 2016Article
- Quantitative Molecular Detection of 19 Major Pathogens in the Interdental Biofilm of Periodontally Healthy Young Adults.Frontiers in microbiology · 2016Article
- Interdental hygiene index - A proposal of dual-purpose tool for patient assessment and motivation.Journal of Indian Society of PeriodontologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to evaluate the concordance between the empirical choice of interdental brushes of different diameters compared to the gold standard, the IAP CURAPROX(©) calibrating colorimetric probe. It is carried out with the aim of facilitating the consensus development of best practices. All the subjects' interproximal spaces were evaluated using the reference technique (colorimetric probe), then after a time lapse of 1.2 ± 0.2 hours, using the empirical clinical technique (brushes) by the same examiner. Each examiner explored 3 subjects. The order the patients were examined with the colorimetric interdental probe (CIP) was random. 446 sites were selected in the study out of 468 potential sites. The correspondence of scores between interdental bushes vs. colorimetric probe is 43.0% [95%-CI: 38.5-47.6]. In 33.41% of the 446 sites, the brush is inferior to the probe; in 23.54% of cases, the brush is superior to the probe. Among the discrepancies there is thus a tendency for the subjects to use brushes with smaller diameter than that recommended by the colorimetric probe. This review has found very high-quality evidence that colorimetric probes plus interdental brushing is more beneficial than interdental brushing alone for increase the concordance between the empirical choice of interdental brushes of different diameters compared to the gold standard. Uncertainties remain and further research is required to provide detailed data on user satisfaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.