Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35906557›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2022

Delay discounting, probability discounting, and interdental cleaning frequency.

Anthony DeFulio, Mark Rzeszutek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2022. 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

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

2 authors.

Anthony DeFulioDepartment of Psychology, Western Michigan University, 1903 W Michigan Ave., Mail Stop 5439, Kalamazoo, MI, 49008, USA. anthony.defulio@wmich.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-8211-7047
Mark RzeszutekDepartment of Psychology, Western Michigan University, 1903 W Michigan Ave., Mail Stop 5439, Kalamazoo, MI, 49008, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterdental cleaning is recommended by dentists but many people do not floss regularly. The health benefits of interdental cleaning are delayed, and sensitivity to delay is an important factor in many health behaviors. Thus, the present studies explore the relationship between frequency of flossing, and sensitivity to delayed and probabilistic outcomes.

methodCrowd-sourced subjects were recruited in two studies (n = 584 and n = 321, respectively). In both studies, subjects reported their frequency of flossing and completed delay discounting and probability discounting tasks. Discounting was measured with area under the curve, and linear regression was used to analyze the results.

resultsFindings show that higher levels of delay discounting were associated with less frequent flossing (p < 0.001, both studies). In contrast, probability discounting was not significantly associated with flossing frequency (ns, both studies).

conclusionThe findings are consistent with prior studies involving other health behaviors such as attendance at primary care and medication adherence. Results suggest that interventions that reduce delay discounting may help promote regular interdental cleaning, and that delay discounting is a more robust predictor of health behaviors than probability discounting. In addition, interdental cleaning appears to be a reasonable target behavior for evaluating potentially generalizable behavioral health interventions. Thus, interventions that are successful in promoting oral health behaviors should be considered as candidates for evaluation in other health behavior domains.

Indexed as

Delay DiscountingDental Devices, Home CareHumansProbabilityBehavioral economicsFlossingImpulsivityOral healthPreventive health behavior

Identifiers

PMID35906557
PMCPMC9335449

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.