Trial reportInternational dental journal2019
Assessment of oral health-related quality of life as a function of non-invasive treatment with high-fluoride toothpastes for root caries lesions in community-dwelling elderly.
Trial report in International dental journal, 2019. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Coronal and Root Caries in Older Adults: Associated Factors, Quality of Life Impact, and Treatment-A Scoping Review.Gerodontology · 2026Article
- The Relationship Between Dental Anxiety and Oral Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Periodontitis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Dental anxiety and oral health-related quality of life before and after non-surgical periodontal treatment.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
- Burnout: A predictor of oral health impact profile among Nigerian early career doctors.PloS one · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeNon-invasive treatment of root caries lesions (RCLs) may impact oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), but no evidence is available. The purpose of the study was to assess changes in OHRQoL among patients exposed to non-invasive treatment of RCLs with conventional or high-fluoride dentifrices.
methodsTo be eligible, subjects had to be ≥60 years of age, independently living, with at least five teeth and one RCL. The 14-item Oral Health Impact Profile for adults in Spanish (OHIP-14Sp), oral examination and sociodemographic data were documented at the beginning of the study (T0). The presence and activity of RCLs were detected and diagnosed. Subjects were randomly assigned to either the control (1,450 ppm fluoride) or the experimental (5,000 ppm fluoride) treatment group. A new set of measurements was obtained at 12 months (T1). Mean comparisons were carried out using the Student's t-test for total OHIP-14Sp scores. To determine whether T1 OHRQoL scores were different regarding sex, age, educational level and socio-economic status, mean OHIP-14Sp scores were obtained and compared with those variables at 12 months.
resultsAn overall improvement in OHRQoL after the non-invasive treatment of RCLs was verified when T1 was compared with T0 (P < 0.0001). Regarding treatment type, no significant differences were detected between groups (P = 0.114). Subjects with higher income and more years of formal education had better OHRQoL than those with a lower salary (P < 0.0001) and with fewer years of education (P = 0.0006).
conclusionsNon-invasive treatment for RCLs in community-dwelling elders appears to cause a positive impact on OHRQoL. Better OHRQoL was associated with higher socio-economic status and educational level. No significant differences were detected regarding the fluoride concentration in the dentifrices.
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.