ArticleInternational dental journal2018
Different views of dentists and general medical practitioners on dental care for patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary heart diseases: results of a questionnaire-based survey in a district of Germany.
Article in International dental journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Raising medical students' awareness for the interdependence between oral health and systemic diseases - evaluation of a problem-based learning intervention: an exploratory pilot study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Locally delivered 1% metformin gel improves periodontal parameters: A systematic review and meta-analysis.The Saudi dental journal · 2025Review
- A Cross-sectional Study on the Knowledge, Attitudes, and Performance of Iranian Endodontists Regarding Diabetic Patients.Iranian endodontic journal · 2025Article
- Lack of oral health awareness and interdisciplinary dental care: a survey in patients prior to endoprosthesis and orthopaedic centres in Germany.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Referral Compliance Following a Diabetes Screening in a Dental Setting: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Oral Health Knowledge and Habits of People With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes.International dental journal · 2022Article
- Evaluation of an educational concept for risk-oriented prevention in undergraduate dental education.BMC medical education · 2020Observational
- Oral health and dental behaviour of patients with left ventricular assist device: a cross-sectional study.ESC heart failure · 2020Article
- Lack in Periodontal Care of Patients Suffering from Severe Heart Diseases-Results after 12 Months Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Changing the Focus to the Whole Patient instead of One Oral Disease: The Concept of Individualized Prevention.Advances in preventive medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this questionnaire-based study was to evaluate the views of dentists (Ds) and general medical practitioners (GPs) on different aspects of dental care for patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) or coronary heart disease (CHD).
methodsReliable and comparable questionnaires for Ds and GPs, with 23 questions, were sent to 1,000 randomly selected Ds and 1,000 randomly selected GPs. Questions were asked about patients with DM or CHD regarding their dental care and potentially related issues (e.g. antibiotic prophylaxis). The responses received within 12 weeks were evaluated and statistically analysed using chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests (P < 0.05).
resultsThe response rate was 39% (n = 391) for Ds and 18% (n = 181) for GPs. Both groups stated that they used the medical history as well as patient interviews to assess patients. However, only 55% of Ds assumed correct identification of every at-risk patient compared with 100% of GPs (P < 0.01). Furthermore, Ds speculated that they inform their patients more often about their at-risk status than do GPs (P < 0.01). Neither Ds nor GPs appeared to be confident in their knowledge about adequate antibiotic prophylaxis. Interdisciplinary collaboration was considered insufficient, although Ds had a higher rate of regular collaboration (68% for Ds vs. 40% for GPs; P < 0.01).
conclusionDs and GPs have differing views on dental care of patients with DM or CHD, and Ds showed more interest in this issue. These results might partially explain the insufficient collaboration between Ds and GPs.
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.