ArticleJAMA network open2019
Follow-up of an Intervention to Reduce Dental Caries in Indigenous Australian Children: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Interventions with pregnant women, new mothers and other primary caregivers for preventing early childhood caries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Family-centred interventions for Indigenous early childhood well-being by primary healthcare services.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic Review of Intervention Studies Aiming at Reducing Inequality in Dental Caries among Children.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Early childhood caries intervention in Aboriginal Australian children: Follow-up at child age 9 years.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Early Childhood Caries Intervention in Aboriginal Australian Children: A Cross-in Randomized Trial.JDR clinical and translational research · 2024Trial
- Follow-up of Intervention to Prevent Dental Caries Among Indigenous Children in Australia: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2019Trial
- Economic evaluation on dental caries preventive interventions for Australian children using a priority-setting approach.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Article
- Caregivers' views on childcare staff's role in promoting children's oral health.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Social determinants of oral health in an indigenous community of Chile: preliminary data of a mixed qualitative and quantitative study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- A Silver Fluoride Intervention to Improve Oral Health Trajectories of Young Indigenous Australians: Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Developing and assessing the efficiency of VOSER software in recording dental caries according to WHO's criteria 2013.Journal of dental sciences · 2023Article
- Exploring the Reported Strengths and Limitations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Research: A Narrative Review of Intervention Studies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Oral Health Coaches at Well-Baby Clinics to Promote Oral Health in Preschool Children From the First Erupted Tooth: Protocol for a Multisite, Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Article
- Associations between dental care approachability and dental attendance among women pregnant with an Indigenous child: a cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2021Article
- Cohort profile: South Australian Aboriginal Birth Cohort (SAABC)-a prospective longitudinal birth cohort.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Challenges and Solutions for Improved Oral Health: Examples from Motivational Interviewing Trials.JDR clinical and translational research · 2020Article
- Is There an Association between Breastfeeding and Dental Caries among Three-Year-Old Australian Aboriginal Children?Nutrients · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Testing the long-term usefulness of a childhood intervention and determining the best age of implementation are important for translation and policy change. Objectives: To investigate among children aged 3 years the long-term effectiveness an intervention that aimed to reduce dental caries among South Australian Aboriginal children and to assess if children in the delayed intervention (DI) group had any benefit from the intervention from ages 2 to 3 years and if the intervention usefulness was greater when delivered between pregnancy and age 2 years (immediate intervention [II] vs ages 2 to 3 years [DI]). Design, Setting, and Participants: Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. The study enrolled 448 pregnant women across South Australia, Australia, at baseline (February 1, 2011, to May 30, 2012), with 223 randomly allocated to the II group and 225 to the DI group. Three-year follow-up data were collected November 2014 to February 2016. Interventions: The intervention comprised dental treatment to mothers, fluoride varnish application to children, and motivational interviewing delivered together with anticipatory guidance. This was delivered during pregnancy and at child ages 6, 12, and 18 months for the II group and at child ages 24, 30, and 36 months for the DI group. Main Outcomes and Measures: The mean number of decayed teeth measured at child age 3 years. Results: There were 324 children at age 3 years (52.3% male). The mean number of decayed teeth at age 3 years was 1.44 (95% CI, 1.38-1.50) for the II group and 1.86 (95% CI, 1.89-2.03) for the DI group (mean difference, -0.41; 95% CI, -0.52 to -0.10). The predicted mean number of decayed teeth at age 3 years for the DI group was 2.15. Between ages 2 and 3 years, the caries increment for the II group was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.75-0.89), compared with 0.97 (95% CI, 0.87-1.17) for the DI group (P = .05). Conclusions and Relevance: At the 3-year follow-up, II children had less dental caries than DI children, DI children developed dental caries at a lower trajectory than predicted had the intervention not been received at ages 2 to 3 years, and the caries increment was less between ages 2 to 3 years among II children compared with DI children. This study suggests that the best time to implement the intervention is earlier rather than later infancy. Trial Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry Ideintifier: ACTRN12611000111976.
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.