Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27339232›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2016

Little research on effective tools to improve patient safety in the dental setting.

Dominic Hurst

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Dominic HurstDental Public Health Unit, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK and Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Data sourcesMedline via OVID, Embase via OVID, HMIC via OVID, CINAHL via EBSCO and Web of Science.Study selectionDescriptive, observational and experimental studies that used or described the development of patient safety interventions relating to dental care. Outcomes of interest were: patient safety, harm prevention, risk minimisation, patient satisfaction and patient acceptability, professional acceptability, efficacy, cost-effectiveness and efficiency.Data extraction and synthesisAll titles and abstracts were screened by at least two authors. The eligible studies were data extracted by two authors, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer if necessary. A narrative approach was taken and quality assessed using CASP tools.ResultsNine studies were identified. Four described the use of checklists, three the use of reporting systems, one the use of electronic reminders and one the use of trigger tools. The risk of bias in the studies was high.ConclusionsThe available literature on patient safety is in its infancy. Surgical checklists may be effective in reducing surgical errors.

Indexed as

Dental CarePatient SafetyCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansResearch

Identifiers

PMID27339232

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.