ArticleJDR clinical and translational research2017
Judgment of the Quality of Restorative Care as Predictors of Restoration Retreatment: Findings from the National Dental PBRN.
Article in JDR clinical and translational research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Conceptualising a framework for improving quality in primary dental care.British dental journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The primary aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that a patient's subjective assessments of the dentist's technical competence, quality of care, and anticipated restoration longevity during a restorative visit are predictive of restoration outcome. This prospective cohort study involved 3,326 patients who received treatment for a defective restoration in a permanent tooth, participated in a baseline patient satisfaction survey, and returned for follow-up. Of the 4,400 restorations that were examined by 150 dentists, 266 (6%) received additional treatment after baseline. Reporting satisfaction with the technical skill of the dentist or quality of the dental work at baseline was not associated with retreatment after baseline. However, patients' views at baseline that the fee was reasonable (odds ratio [OR], 1.6) was associated with retreatment after baseline, whereas satisfaction at baseline with how long the filling would last (OR, 0.6) was associated with less retreatment. These findings suggest that retreatment occurs more often for patients who at baseline are satisfied with the cost or who at baseline have less confidence in the restoration. The authors found no associations between restoration retreatment and the patients' baseline evaluations of the technical skills of their dentists or perceptions of quality care. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT: Dental patients' ratings of their dentist's skills were not related to a restoration needing retreatment. Patients focus on other aspects of the dental visit when making this judgment.
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.