SynthesisBMC psychology2017
Theory based interventions for caries related sugar intake in adults: systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC psychology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Components in downstream health promotions to reduce sugar intake among adults: a systematic review.Nutrition journal · 2024Pooled it
- Mobile Apps for Dental Caries Prevention: Systematic Search and Quality Evaluation.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Pooled it
- Can a brief psychological intervention improve oral health behaviour? A randomised controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2018Trial
- Infancy Dietary Patterns, Development, and Health: An Extensive Narrative Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Article
- The Association between Nutritional Alterations and Oral Lesions in a Pediatric Population: An Epidemiological Study.BioMed research international · 2021Article
- A behavioural intervention for young adults with dental caries, using acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT): treatment manual and case illustration.BMC oral health · 2020Article
- The Psychological Models of Health-related Behavior in Understanding Sugars Intake in Adults: A Review.Oman medical journal · 2020Review
- The Joint ORCA-EADPH Symposium on Sugar: The Oral Health Perspective - A Commentary.Caries research · 2019Article
- Added Sugar and Dental Caries in Children: A Scientific Update and Future Steps.Dental clinics of North America · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTheories of behavior change are essential in the design of effective behaviour change strategies. No studies have assessed the effectiveness of interventions based on psychological theories to reduce sugar intake related to dental caries. The study assessed the effect of interventions based on Social Congition Models (SCMs) on sugar intake in adults, when compared with educational interventions or no intervention.
methodsA range of papers were considered: Systematic review Systematic Reviews with or without Meta Analyses; Randomised Controlled Trials; Controlled Clinical Trials and Before and after studies, of interventions based on Social Cognition Models aimed at dietary intake of sugar in adults. The Cochrane database including: Oral Health Group's Trials Register (2015), MEDLINE (from 1966 to September 2015), EMBASE (from 1980 to September 2015), PsycINFO (from 1966 to September 2015) were searched.
resultsNo article met the full eligibility criteria for the current systematic review so no articles were included.
conclusionThere is a need for more clinical trials to assess the effectiveness of interventions based on psychological theory in reducing dietary sugar intake among adults. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42015026357 .
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.