Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30256813›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Evaluating the validity and reliability of a visual dental scale for detection of periodontal disease (PD) in non-anesthetized dogs (Canis familiaris).

Amy E Bauer, Judith Stella, Matthew Lemmons, Candace C Croney

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

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 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. BiomimeticInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Periodontal and Dental Status in Packs of Spanish Dogs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amy E BauerDepartment of Comparative Pathobiology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6822-5415
Judith StellaUSDA-APHIS, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States of America.
Matthew LemmonsMedVet, Carmel, Indiana, United States of America.
Candace C CroneyDepartment of Comparative Pathobiology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States of America.
Purdue University West Lafayette · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Periodontal disease is one of the most common conditions affecting companion dogs. The objectives of this cross-sectional study were: to determine 1) the agreement between visual assessments (VA) of periodontal disease (PD) performed on awake dogs and the reference standard (RS) of a dental examination and radiographs performed with the dog under general anesthesia, and 2) inter-rater reliability (IRR) for two individuals performing VAs of PD on the same dogs. One hundred and eight dogs were recruited from three veterinary practices. An oral examination and visual PD staging based on the American Veterinary Dental College's (AVDC) 5-point scale was performed by the investigators prior to general anesthesia and the dental procedure. After the anesthetic evaluation and radiographs, the attending veterinarian staged each dog based on the AVDC's 5-point scale. Agreement between the VA and RS as well as IRR were determined using percent agreement and a weighted kappa statistic. Eighty-nine dogs received a complete oral examination under general anesthesia with periodontal probing and full-mouth radiographs. Fifty-nine dogs received a VA by both raters. VA agreed with the RS 41.57% of the time with a weighted kappa of 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.29-0.55), indicating moderate agreement. Between raters, VA agreed 61.02% of the time with a weighted kappa of 0.63 (95% confidence interval 0.49-0.76), indicating substantial IRR. The results of this study reinforce the idea that an oral examination in an awake dog can be a helpful screening tool, but should not be considered a comprehensive evaluation of periodontal health. In facilities housing large numbers of dogs such as shelters, breeding kennels, and research facilities, use of a VA can aid in identifying and prioritizing dogs most in need of procedures such as professional cleaning, periodontal treatment, including closed root planing, or surgical care.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, GeneralAnimalsCross-Sectional StudiesDog DiseasesDogsFemaleMalePeriodontal DiseasesRadiography, DentalReproducibility of ResultsUnited StatesVeterinarians

Identifiers

PMID30256813
PMCPMC6157863
OpenAlexW2893194469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.