Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Efficacy of a U-Shaped Automatic Electric Toothbrush in Dental Plaque Removal: A Cross-Over Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of plaque removal by a single-headed versus a triple-headed manual toothbrush using different plaque assessment tools.Canadian journal of dental hygiene : CJDH = Journal canadien de l'hygiene dentaire : JCHD · 2024Trial
- Efficacy of an automatic electric toothbrush with nylon bristles in dental plaque removal: a cross-over randomized controlled trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Trial
- Silicone toothbrushes: A scoping review of an underutilized tool in global oral health.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Comparison of the Effectiveness of Three Different Types of Toothbrushes Among 8-12-year-old Children.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- Pilot study of the effectiveness and acceptability of an automatic toothbrush among residents in long-term care.Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric Dentistry · 2024Article
- Innovations in oral hygiene tools: a mini review on recent developments.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2024Review
- Gingival recessions caused by Herpes Simplex Virus in a patient with COVID-19 infection.Clinical case reports · 2022Article
- Efficacy of the fully automated oral care robot with adjunctive MA-T gel for dental biofilm removal: A prospective crossover study.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this single-use, four-treatment, four-period (visit), cross-over, mono-centered, examiner-blind, cross-over randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to evaluate the efficacy in dental plaque removal of a U-shaped automatic electric toothbrush (U) compared to a conventional powered toothbrush (P), a habitual toothbrushing procedure (H), and no brushing (N).
methodsEligible participants were volunteer students. Primary outcome measure was the reduction in full-mouth plaque score (FMPS) after brushing. The secondary outcome variable was a visual analogic scale (VAS) on subjective clean mouth sensation. Mixed models were performed for difference in FMPS and VAS.
resultsTwenty-two participants were randomized to the treatments in the four periods of the study. The differences between treatments in FMPS reduction after brushing were statistically significant (
conclusionsThe U-shaped automatic electric toothbrush tested in this study proved to be not effective in removing dental plaque.
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.