ArticleJDR clinical and translational research2016
Understanding Pediatric Dentists' Dental Caries Management Treatment Decisions: A Conjoint Experiment.
Article in JDR clinical and translational research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment Gaps Among Young Medicaid-Enrolled Children with Tooth Decay in Pediatric Primary Care.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Dental Restorative Materials in the Atraumatic Treatment of Carious Primary Teeth in Pediatric Dentistry: A Systematic Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Dental Decision-Making in Pediatric Dentistry: A Cross-Sectional Case-Based Questionnaire Among Dentists in Germany.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Management Thresholds for Molars With Occlusal Noncavitated Caries Lesions.International dental journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When traditional ranking and rating surveys are used to assess dentists' treatment decisions, the patient's source of payment appears to be of little importance. Therefore, this study used the marketing research tool conjoint analysis to investigate the relative impact of source of payment along with the child's age and cooperativeness on pediatric dentists' willingness to use Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) to restore posterior primary teeth. A conjoint survey was completed by 707 pediatric dentists. Three factors (age of the child, cooperativeness, type of insurance) were varied across 3 levels to create 9 patient scenarios. The relative weights that dentists placed on these factors in the restorative treatment decision process were determined by conjoint analysis. "Cooperativeness" (52%) was the most important factor, "age of the child" (26%) the second-most important factor, followed by "insurance status of the child" (22%). For the third factor, insurance, pediatric dentists were least willing to use ART with publicly insured children (-0.082), and this was significantly different from their willingness to use ART with uninsured children (0.010) but not significantly different than their willingness to use ART for children with private insurance (0.073). Unlike traditional ranking and rating tools, conjoint analysis found that the insurance status of the patient appeared to be an important factor in dentists' decisions about different restorative treatment options. When pediatric dentists were forced to make tradeoffs among different patients' factors, they were most willing to use ART technique with young, uncooperative patients when they had no insurance.
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.