ArticlePloS one2018
Use of scientific evidence by dentists in Brazil: Room for improving the evidence-based practice.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feedback on audit and action planning for dental caries control: a qualitative study to investigate the acceptability among interdisciplinary pediatric dental care teams.Frontiers in oral health · 2023Article
- Knowledge, attitudes and practices towards Evidence-Based-Dentistry regarding dental practitioner: A cross-sectional study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Article
- Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the use of scientific evidence and the practice of evidence-based dentistry (EBD) among dentists working in Brazil. An online questionnaire was emailed to dentists registered with Brazilian state dental councils. The questionnaire assessed the demographic, educational, and work characteristics of the sample, along with habits in reading scientific articles and other updating resources. Data were analyzed descriptively and by using Bonferroni, Kruskal-Wallis, ANOVA, and T-test statistical methods (α = 0.05). A total of 795 responses were received between June, 2015 and January, 2016. The response rate was not calculated because it was not possible to determine precisely how many dentists received these e-mails. Over 77% of the responding dentists completed postgraduate training. They referred mainly to books, scientific or clinical journals, conferences, and short-term courses for updating their knowledge. Dentists who reported having a habit of reading scientific journals (60.9%) showed a preference for reading case reports, clinical research articles, and literature reviews. Most dentists (77.5%) reported changing their clinical behaviors or procedures based on information gleaned from journal articles. The types of articles that led them to change their clinical practices were primarily clinical research articles and case reports. Working in the public sector was also associated with a lower prevalence of a habit of reading scientific journals and practicing EBD (i.e., self-reported practice). The results suggest that dentists are interested in reading journal articles, especially those addressing clinical outcomes, and that there is room for improving the practice of EBD, particularly in the public sector.
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.