ArticleEuropean oral research2020
Turkish adaptation and implementation of the modified infection control questionnaire in intraoral digital imaging.
Article in European oral research, 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.
- Clinical Evaluation of ODIS-1 Orthodontic Operation and Image Quality of Digital Imaging SystemCurrent medical imaging · 2025Article
- Assessment of infection control in oral radiology during the COVID-19 outbreak: An international collaborative study.Imaging science in dentistry · 2023Article
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
purposeThere are very few studies evaluating the knowledge of dentists about infection precautions in oral radiology. The aim of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the modified form of a developed questionnaire and to apply this questionnaire to Turkish dentists. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe questionnaire was applied to a sample of 250 dentists for the scale development [200 for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and 50 for control] and 173 dentists for the implementation of the scale. The scale was applied to 200 dentists and construct validity was examined with CFA. For model fit; chi square to df ratio, RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation), TLI (Tucker-Lewis Index), CFI (Comparative Fit Index), GFI (goodness of fit index), AGFI (adjusted goodness of fit index) and NFI (normed fit index) were obtained. Also, reliability analysis was applied and itemtotal correlations and Cronbach's alpha values were given. Adapted scale scores using a different sample of 173 dentists were compared according to demographic characteristics.
resultsCFA showed good fit statistics (X2/df=1.511, RMSEA=0.057, TLI=0.942, CFI=0.953, GFI=0.926, AGFI=0.900, NFI=0.928) for the scale. Item-total correlations were over 0.30 and Cronbach's alpha was calculated as 0.877. In addition, experienced dentists had higher scores in the dimension of personal hygiene (p<0.05).
conclusionThe Turkish version of the modified infection control questionnaire in oral radiology showed adequate psychometric properties. This indicated that it could be a valid and reliable tool for the assessment of infection control in oral radiology among Turkish dentists.
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.