Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34001087›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2021

"Strong Teeth": an early-phase study to assess the feasibility of an oral health intervention delivered by dental teams to parents of young children.

Erin Giles, K A Gray-Burrows, A Bhatti, L Rutter, J Purdy, T Zoltie, S Pavitt, Z Marshman, R West, P F Day

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Erin GilesDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9LU, UK. e.giles@leeds.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-8631-4809
K A Gray-BurrowsDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9LU, UK.
A BhattiDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9LU, UK.
L RutterDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9LU, UK.
J PurdyDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9LU, UK.
T ZoltieDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9LU, UK.
S PavittDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9LU, UK.
Z MarshmanSchool of Dentistry, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S10 2TA, UK.
R WestDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9LU, UK.
P F DayDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9LU, UK.
University of Leeds · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTooth decay (caries) is a significant health burden in young children. There is strong evidence for the benefits of establishing appropriate home-based oral health behaviours in early childhood. Dental teams are well placed to provide this information and there is clear advice on what oral health information should be given to parents. However, research has shown that there is limited guidance, training and resources on how dental teams should deliver this advice. "Strong Teeth" is a complex oral health intervention, using evidence-based resources and training underpinned by behaviour change psychology, to support behaviour change conversations in dental practice. This early phase evaluation aims to assess the feasibility of this intervention, prior to a full-scale trial.

methodsThe study recruited 15 parents of children aged 0-2-years-old and 21 parents of children aged 3-5 years old, from five NHS dental practices across West Yorkshire. Participant demographics, self-reported brushing behaviours, dietary habits, a dental examination and three objective measures of toothbrushing were collected in a home-setting at baseline, then at 2-weeks and 2-months post-intervention. Recruitment, retention and intervention delivery were analysed as key process outcomes. Brushing habits were compared to national toothbrushing guidelines - the Delivering Better Oral Health toolkit (Public Health England).

resultsStrong Teeth was feasible to deliver in a General Dental Practice setting in 94% of cases. Feasibility of recruitment (37%) exceeded progression criterion, however retention of participants (75%) was below the progression criterion for the 0-2 age group. More than half of children recruited aged 3-5-years had caries experience (52%). Total compliance to toothbrushing guidance at baseline was low (28%) and increased after the intervention (52%), an improvement that was statistically significant. Dietary habits remained largely unchanged. Plaque scores significantly decreased in the 3-5-year-olds and toothbrushing duration increased in all age groups.

conclusion"Strong Teeth" intervention delivery and data collection in the home setting was feasible. There was a positive indication of impact on reported toothbrushing behaviours. Some amendments to study design, particularly relating to the inclusion of the 0-2-year-old group, should be considered before progression to a full trial. Trial registration ISRCTN Register: ISRCTN10709150. Registered retrospectively 24/7/2019.

Indexed as

Dental CariesOral HealthChildChild, PreschoolEnglandFeasibility StudiesHumansInfantInfant, NewbornParentsRetrospective StudiesToothbrushingBehaviour changeCariesPaediatricParentsPreventionTraining

Identifiers

PMID34001087
PMCPMC8130402
OpenAlexW3116759300

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.