ArticleBritish dental journal2021
Evaluation of the information provided by UK dental practice websites regarding complications of dental implants.
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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Navigating Dental Implant Information on Social Media: A Qualitative Exploration of Digital Health Literacy and Resilience to Misinformation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Review
- Evaluation of the Information on Dutch Dental Practice Websites Regarding the Treatment of (Frail) Elderly Patients.International dental journal · 2025Article
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
Introduction Dental implants are a popular option for replacing missing teeth. When searching for information regarding dental implants, patients may first look to their dental practice website. The aim of this study was to assess the variance of patient information provided regarding implant complications on dental implant practice websites.Materials and methods Inclusion criteria for this study were dental practices within the Greater Glasgow & Clyde health board and practices with an active website. Completeness was assessed using a six-point score based on the British Association of Oral Surgeons 'Information for patients' leaflet and Association of Dental Implantology 'Considering dental implants? - A patient's guide to dental implant treatment' leaflet.Results In total, 90.7% (n = 107) of practices provided accessible implant information on their websites. However, only 37.3% (n = 44) mentioned one or more specified dental implant complications. Pain/discomfort was the most frequently stated complication (n = 41/118); implant failure was only mentioned by 19 practices (16%). The mean number of complications mentioned by the 118 practices offering dental implants was 1.1.Discussion As implant dentistry grows, there may be concerns over patient expectations. To overcome lack of quality assurance on the internet, dentists can provide factual information on their websites. They should be aware of their duty to provide material that is accurate, honest, informative and not potentially misleading.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34172870What 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.