ArticleTurkish journal of orthodontics2017
Information on the Internet Regarding Orthognathic Surgery in Turkey: Is It an Adequate Guide for Potential Patients?
Article in Turkish journal of orthodontics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the Quality of Educational Content of YouTube Videos on Silver Diamine Fluoride.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2024Article
- Quality assessment of available Internet information on early orthodontic treatment.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Reliability of Educational Content Videos in YouTubeChildren (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Quality and reliability of web-based information regarding restorative treatment in pediatric patients.European oral research · 2021Article
- Assessment of Reliability of YouTube Videos on Orthodontics.Turkish journal of orthodontics · 2019Article
- The Accuracy of Information about Orthodontics Available on the Internet.Turkish journal of orthodontics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the quality of information on websites regarding orthognathic surgery in Turkey using the DISCERN toolkit.
methodsAn Internet search was performed using the Google search engine with the terms "orthognathic surgery", "jaw surgery", "jaw operation", "correcting jaw surgery", and "surgery orthodontics." The first 25 websites obtained after searching for each term were evaluated. Duplicate websites, advertisements, discussion groups, links to research articles, videos, and images were not considered. The remaining websites were analyzed using the DISCERN toolkit. This toolkit is composed of 15 questions that were scored from 1 to 5. Results were calculated as mean scores, percentages, and ranges.
resultsAmong the 36 evaluated websites, 12 (33.3%) belonged to plastic surgeons, 11 (30.6%) belonged to orthodontists, 8 (22.2%) belonged to private dental clinics, 3 (8.3%) belonged to maxillofacial surgeons, 1 (2.8%) was a professional organization website, and 1 (2.8%) belonged to a private hospital. The Turkish Orthodontic Society had the only listed professional organization website. The mean total DISCERN score was 28/75 (range: 15-48). The overall quality of information in 44.4% of the websites was low. The main problems of websites were as follows: no mention of the aims, sources, and production time of information; no links for additional sources of information; and no information for patient carers.
conclusionThe quality of web-based information on orthognathic surgery was generally low. Higher quality information provided by public organizations that do not have profit concerns is required.
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.