Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33767368›Full record

ArticleBritish dental journal2021

Advertising and facial aesthetics in primary care: how compliant are practice websites and social media with published guidance?

Christopher C Donnell, Julian J Woolley, Stuart W Worthington

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British dental journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Christopher C DonnellDental Core Trainee, Newcastle Dental Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne NHS Hospitals Foundation Trust, UK.
Julian J WoolleyDental Core Trainee, King's College London, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Stuart W WorthingtonSpeciality Registrar, Dental Public Health, Public Health England, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. stuart.worthington@phe.gov.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims and objectives To assess compliance of dental practices across North East England and North Cumbria (NENC) with General Dental Council (GDC) Guidance on advertising and Advertising Standards Agency-Committee of Advertising Practice (ASA-CAP) Regulation 12.12 - prohibition of marketing prescription-only medicines/treatments to the public. To provide checklists for registrants to safeguard their own compliance with GDC guidance and ASA-CAP advertising regulations.Materials and methods All premises providing dental care in NENC were identified from the Care Quality Commission (CQC) database and subsequently checked against the GDC Guidance on advertising and the ASA-CAP code for advertising prescription-only medicines, specifically relating to aesthetic treatments.Results Of the 450 dental practices sampled, 84.7% had a website, 72.7% had a Facebook page and 34% had an Instagram account. Only seven websites (1.8%) were fully compliant with GDC advertising guidance. Of the 450 practices sampled, 148 websites, 51 Facebook pages and 41 Instagram accounts mentioned or offered skin treatments. Only six websites and three Facebook pages were fully compliant. No Instagram accounts were compliant.Conclusions Compliance with the most up-to-date advertising guidelines from the GDC and ASA-CAP is generally poor. A lack of registrant knowledge surrounding the scope of guidance available has most likely resulted in inadvertent non-compliance. Checklists should help improve compliance.

Identifiers

PMID33767368
PMCPMC7992508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.