ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2019
A Study of Dentists about Their Knowledge and Practice of Dentine Hypersensitivity.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and managing dentine hypersensitivity in clinical practice: insights from the Middle East and Africa.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Review
- Knowledge and Attitudes on Preventing and Treating Dentin Hypersensitivity and Its Predicting Factors: A Cross-sectional Study with Brazilian Citizens.European journal of dentistry · 2023Article
- The Retention Effect of Resin-Based Desensitizing Agents on Hypersensitivity-A Randomized Controlled Trial.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Effects of 1450-ppm Fluoride-containing Toothpastes Associated with Boosters on the Enamel Remineralization and Surface Roughness after Cariogenic Challenge.European journal of dentistry · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the knowledge and practice about dentine hypersensitivity (DH) among dental practitioners. MATERIALS AND
methodsA pilot-tested questionnaire was sent to practicing dentists ( STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Basic statistics, chi-squared test, and multivariate logistic regression were performed.
resultsMost dentists (64.3%) reported examining one to five patients with DH per week in their dental clinics. A large majority (85.4%) indicated DH as a stimulated short pain from a tooth. Recession of gums (96.6%), aggressive brushing (88.2%), and frequent use of teeth whitening procedures (83.1%) were most frequently reported predisposing factors of DH. Among most commonly used methods of diagnosis, spontaneous pain after the application of air blast was reported by 74.8% of the participants and followed by spontaneous patient report confirmed by dental examination (57.7%). Most widely used management approaches of DH included the use of fluoride products (96.2%), use of desensitizing potassium nitrate toothpastes (75%), and application of bonding agents (56.2%). Female versus male dentists (odds ratio [OR]: 7.79,
conclusionDentists used various methods for diagnosing and managing patients with DH. Application of air blast to evaluate spontaneous pain and use of fluoride products were most widely used diagnostic and management preferences, respectively.
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.