Trial reportScientific reports2018
Clinical management and prevention of dental caries in athletes: A four-year randomized controlled clinical trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of the long-term use of oral hygiene products containing stannous ions on the salivary microbiome - a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2020Trial
- Endodontic status and oral health in athlete and non-athlete young adults in relation to nutrition and psychological factors.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Oral health, orofacial pain and dysfunction, and orofacial trauma in athletes: a scoping review.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Impact of physical activity on oral health: A systematic review.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Review
- Long-Term Use of Oral Hygiene Products Containing Stannous and Fluoride Ions: Effect on Viable Salivary Bacteria.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- The Current Strategies in Controlling Oral Diseases by Herbal and Chemical Materials.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021Review
- Stannous Fluoride Effects on Enamel: A Systematic Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Prevalence and risk indicators of non-carious cervical lesions in male footballers.BMC oral health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aims of this four-year randomized controlled clinical trial were to gain insights into management and prevention of dental caries and the effect of stannous fluoride products in athletes. Fifty-four participants were randomized into test and control groups. The test group used special stannous fluoride products. The primary endpoint dental caries was assessed by the ICDAS-II-System and analyzed both by a linear mixed model for repeated measures and a generalized linear mixed model. During the observation period an increase in caries-free surfaces from 64.91 ± 6.42 at baseline to 73.22 ± 4.43 was observed. In surfaces with caries superficialis and caries media, a decrease from 13.94 ± 5.70 and 2.96 ± 2.55 surfaces at baseline to 7.89 ± 3.18 and 0.46 ± 0.78 after 2.5 years was noted, respectively. The analysis showed no effect of stannous fluoride products, but a significant difference for the time of examination (p < 0.0001). In addition, it could be shown that at any time of examination, the odds of developing caries media on a new surface was significantly lower than at baseline (up to 25-times). Due to biannual dental examinations, professional tooth cleaning and restorative treatment the number of caries-free surfaces increased and the odds of a new surface to be afflicted with caries media decreased 25-fold.
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.