Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28496215›Full record

ArticleBritish dental journal2017

Consent - an update.

E Bright, L D'Cruz, E Milne

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British dental journal, 2017. 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
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

E Bright
L D'CruzWoodford Dental Care, 6 The Broadway, Woodford Green, Essex, IG8 OHL.
E MilneBLM, Plantation Place, 30 Fenchurch Street, London, EC3M 3BL.
European College of Business and Management · GBHarold Wood Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following the judgement in Montgomery in March 2015 which brought the law of consent up to speed with what the GDC 's ethical and professional guidance expected registrants to do, this article looks at how other cases have interpreted Montgomery subsequently and the impact and implications for dentists. The importance of excellent communication is emphasised in order to provide sufficient and relevant information to the particular patient you have sitting in your dental chair.

Indexed as

ChildChildren with DisabilitiesChromosome AberrationsDental CareFemaleHumansInformed ConsentPersonal AutonomyPregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisState MedicineUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID28496215
OpenAlexW2612273471

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.