Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30874781›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2019

Follow-up of an Intervention to Reduce Dental Caries in Indigenous Australian Children: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Lisa M Jamieson, Lisa G Smithers, Joanne Hedges, Jacqueline Aldis, Helen Mills, Kostas Kapellas, Herenia P Lawrence, John R Broughton, Xiangqun Ju

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Systematic Review of Intervention Studies Aiming at Reducing Inequality in Dental Caries among Children.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. 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 · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Lisa M JamiesonAustralian Research Centre for Population Oral Health (ARCPOH), Adelaide Dental School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia.
Lisa G SmithersSchool of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia.
Joanne HedgesAustralian Research Centre for Population Oral Health (ARCPOH), Adelaide Dental School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia.
Jacqueline AldisAustralian Research Centre for Population Oral Health (ARCPOH), Adelaide Dental School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia.
Helen MillsAustralian Research Centre for Population Oral Health (ARCPOH), Adelaide Dental School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia.
Kostas KapellasAustralian Research Centre for Population Oral Health (ARCPOH), Adelaide Dental School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia.
Herenia P LawrenceDental Public Health, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
John R BroughtonDepartment of Oral Diagnostic and Surgical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Xiangqun JuAustralian Research Centre for Population Oral Health (ARCPOH), Adelaide Dental School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Oral HealthAdultAustraliaChild, PreschoolDental CariesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealth PromotionHumansMaleMiddle AgedMothersRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30874781
PMCPMC6484654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.