Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27880790›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Integrating Maternal and Children's Oral Health Promotion into Nursing and Midwifery Practice- A Systematic Review.

Reham Abou El Fadl, Mitch Blair, Sondus Hassounah

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Midwives' knowledge and preventive practices regarding early childhood caries: a quantitative study in France.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Why Is Caries Prevention in Children So Difficult? A Narrative Opinion.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Reham Abou El FadlMPH, School of Public Health, Imperial College of London. Pediatric Dentistry and Dental Public Health Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Mitch BlairDepartment of Paediatrics, River Island Academic Centre for Paediatrics and Child Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Sondus HassounahWHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Education and Training, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobally, oral diseases contribute to major disease problems and oral health disparities persistently exist amongst vulnerable population groups. Two contributory factors to these challenges are the shortage of dental practitioners and the characteristic separation between the medical and dental professions. Nurses and midwives, in particular, are in a potentially excellent position to assist in basic oral health services such as dental health education and intraoral screening. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of integrating promotion of oral health of young children and their mothers into nursing and midwifery practice. METHODS AND

findingsSeven electronic databases including CENTRAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, GLOBAL HEALTH, CINHAL, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched whereas conference proceedings and theses were retrieved via PROQUEST. Only randomized, non-randomized trials and observational studies on preventive oral health programs delivered by nurses or midwives in healthcare settings or through home visits were included. Two investigators reviewed full-text articles independently to decide on eligibility for inclusion. Quality assessment was done using Cochrane tool for risk of bias for randomized trials and Downs and Black assessment tool for all other studies. Out of 3162 retrieved records, twenty one trials on oral health interventions incorporated into standard nursing practice were reviewed. Eighteen programs reported significant positive outcomes including reduction in caries experience, better oral hygiene and dietary habits and increased rates of dental visits amongst young children as reported by their caregivers.

conclusionsIncorporating oral health promotion into nursing practice is a promising initiative for reducing oral health disparities by contributing to a downward trend in caries experience and increased access to dental care especially amongst the poor disadvantaged communities.

Indexed as

Health PromotionNursing, PracticalDatabases, FactualDental CariesFeeding BehaviorFemaleHumansOral HealthOral HygienePregnancy

Identifiers

PMID27880790
PMCPMC5120808

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.