ArticleBritish dental journal2019
Practice, complexity and evidence-based practice.
Article in British dental journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Nurses' Expectations and Experiences of Self-Directed Online Training in Evidence-Based Practice: A Qualitative Study - #EvidencerProject.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- Assessing content validity of the Osteo-TAQ(Aus) using cognitive interviews: cross-jurisdictional evidence from UK osteopathic practice.BMC research notes · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this opinion piece, I explore practice and complexity, the latter a term often used in relation to the field of special care dentistry. As research is usually concerned with generating new knowledge of some sort, I explore how knowledge is viewed from a practice perspective, as shared, transitory and situated in interactions, rather than being a thing possessed. This leads into a discussion of how the word complexity has been viewed in complexity science, contrasting it with the linear models generated in the evidence-based practice realm from research and research-informed guidelines. Finally, I address the inherent paradox of attempting to align linear models generated from research with the complexity of practice. I suggest that to evaluate and improve practices we should use narrative and exploratory methods that allow its complexity to be made sense of, made transparent and made available for interpretation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31300773What 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.