ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2020
Knowledge and Attitude of Dentists and Patients Toward Use and Health Safety of Dental Amalgam in Saudi Arabia.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2020. 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.
- Exploring Professionalism among Final Year Dental Students and New Graduates: Translating Knowledge to Practice.European journal of dentistry · 2023Article
- Effect of Ultrasonic Vibration on Structural and Physical Properties of Resin-Based Dental Composites.Polymers · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess: (1) the perceptions of dentists in Saudi Arabia concerning the amalgam controversy, (2) their attitude toward the ethical responsibility of patient information, and (3) patients' knowledge and attitude toward the use of dental amalgam. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 1,139 dentists were sampled on convenience by electronic survey. The questionnaire contained questions about the safety of dental amalgam, use of amalgam, case selection, alternate materials, and informing their patients about risks of amalgam. Also, 425 patients were sampled on convenience and information collected on their knowledge about amalgam and its acceptance in their oral cavities.
resultsA total of 201 dentists and 425 patients participated in the study. A total of 60% of dentists and specialists declared it safe. A total of 32.4% (31) of general dental practitioners and 41% (43) specialists considered it a moral obligation to inform patients about the potential health risks associated with amalgam. Mercury toxicity was identified as the most common health hazard. About 57.3% dentists and 36.2% specialists opted for superior longevity as the principle advantage. Majority of patients (52.2%) in Saudi Arabia had no knowledge about dental amalgam. While 23.1% (98) had concern about poor color, 8.7% (30) knew it contained silver while only 7.8% (27) patients were aware of its mercury content.
conclusionMajority of dentists in Saudi Arabia found it safe to use amalgam while the patients had little knowledge about the possible issues with amalgam. It is recommended to improve public awareness about impact of mercury containing products on the environment.
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.