Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28662842›Full record

ReviewJournal of dentistry2017

Critical review of willingness to pay for clinical oral health interventions.

Sharon Hui Xuan Tan, Christopher R Vernazza, Rahul Nair

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of dentistry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Parents' Willingness to Invest in Primary Oral Health Prevention for Their Preschool Children.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Prevalence of Missing Values and Protest Zeros in Contingent Valuation in Dental Medicine.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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.

Sharon Hui Xuan TanMinistry of Health Holdings, Singapore 1 Maritime Square, 099253, Singapore. Electronic address: thxsharon@gmail.com.
Christopher R VernazzaCentre for Oral Health Research, Newcastle University Framlington Place, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4BW, United Kingdom. Electronic address: c.r.vernazza@ncl.ac.uk.
Rahul NairUniversity of Adelaide, ARCPOH, Adelaide Dental School, Level 9, AHMS Building, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia. Electronic address: Rahul.n@outlook.com.

Funding

Department of Health CS-2014-14-011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis critical review aimed to identify, consolidate and evaluate the quality of Willingness to Pay (WTP) studies applied to clinical contexts in the field of dentistry.

methodsPubMed and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for relevant publications. Screening and data extraction was then performed. Primary literature in English-language were included to assess the WTP for oral health interventions, when the valuations were applied to a clinical measure. Twenty-six publications met the inclusion criteria.

resultsWTP was elicited mainly via face-to-face interviews (13 publications) and questionnaires (12 publications). The majority (24) of publications selected an out-of-pocket payment vehicle. Eleven publications adopted a bidding method, nine publications adopted an open-ended format, and the remaining six studies adopted a payment card or choice method. Pre-testing was reported in only nine publications, and few studies accounted for starting point bias. Eight of 11 publications found that higher incomes were associated with higher WTP values. The female gender, a younger age and higher education levels were associated with a higher WTP in select studies.

conclusionsOnly a small minority of the studies used strategies to avoid well documented biases related to WTP elicitation. Cost versus benefit of many clinical scenarios remain uninvestigated. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: WTP studies in dentistry may benefit from pre-testing and the inclusion of a script to minimise hypothetical bias. They may also be better conducted face-to-face and via a shuffled payment card method. Income levels, and potentially education levels, gender and age, should be assessed for their influence on WTP values.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAttitude to HealthDatabases, FactualDental CareDentistryFemaleFinancial ManagementHealth ExpendituresHumansIncomeMaleOral HealthSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesContingent valuationCost-benefit analysisDentistryOral healthWillingness-to-pay

Identifiers

PMID28662842
PMCPMC5558873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.