Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29631580›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2018

A survey of cariology teaching in Australia and New Zealand.

Sarah L Raphael, Lyndie A Foster Page, Matthew S Hopcraft, Peter J Dennison, Richard P Widmer, R Wendell Evans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Sarah L RaphaelDepartment of Population Oral Health, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Sydney, Westmead, Australia. sarah.raphael@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2388-6652
Lyndie A Foster PageDepartment of Oral Sciences, The University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Matthew S HopcraftMelbourne Dental School, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Australia.
Peter J DennisonPublic Health Dentistry Specialist, Wellington, New Zealand.
Richard P WidmerDepartment of Dentistry, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia.
R Wendell EvansDepartment of Population Oral Health, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Sydney, Westmead, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Australian and New Zealand chapter of the Alliance for a Cavity Free Future was launched in 2013 and one of its primary aims was to conduct a survey of the local learning and teaching of cariology in dentistry and oral health therapy programs.

methodsA questionnaire was developed using the framework of the European Organisation for Caries Research (ORCA)/Association of Dental Education in Europe (ADEE) cariology survey conducted in Europe in 2009. The questionnaire was comprised of multiple choice and open-ended questions exploring many aspects of the cariology teaching. The survey was distributed to the cariology curriculum coordinator of each of the 21 programs across Australia and New Zealand via Survey Monkey in January 2015. Simple analysis of results was carried out with frequencies and average numbers of hours collated and open-ended responses collected and compiled into tables.

resultsSeventeen responses from a total of 21 programs had been received including 7 Dentistry and 10 Oral Health programs. Key findings from the survey were - one quarter of respondents indicated that cariology was identified as a specific discipline with their course and 41% had a cariology curriculum in written format. With regard to lesion detection and caries diagnosis, all of the program coordinators who responded indicated that visual/tactile methods and radiographic interpretation were recommended with ICDAS also being used by over half them. Despite all respondents teaching early caries lesion management centred on prevention and remineralisation, many taught operative intervention at an earlier stage of lesion depth than current evidence supports. Findings showed over 40% of respondents still teach operative intervention for lesions confined to enamel.

conclusionDespite modern theoretical concepts of cariology being taught in Australia and New Zealand, they do not appear to be fully translated into clinical teaching at the present time.

Indexed as

CurriculumEducation, DentalAustraliaDental CariesDental Caries Activity TestsDentistry, OperativeHumansNew ZealandProgram EvaluationSurveys and QuestionnairesTeachingCariologyCurriculumEducationMinimum interventionPrevention

Identifiers

PMID29631580
PMCPMC5892021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.