ArticleJournal of public health dentistry2023
Development of quality measures to assess tooth decay outcomes from electronic health record data.
Article in Journal of public health dentistry, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying Gaps in Caries Prevention and Management: A Multi-Institutional Mixed-Methods Study.Research square · 2025Article
- Learning from data in dentistry: Summary of the third annual OpenWide conference.Learning health systems · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo develop outcomes of care quality measures derived from the dental electronic health record (EHR) to assess the occurrence and timely treatment of tooth decay.
methodsQuality measures were developed to assess whether decay was treated within 6 months and if new decay occurred in patients seen. Using EHR-derived data of the state of each tooth surface, algorithms compared the patient's teeth at different dates to determine if decay was treated or new decay had occurred. Manual chart reviews were conducted at three sites to validate the measures. The measures were implemented and scores were calculated for three sites over four calendar years, 2016 through 2019.
resultsAbout 954 charts were manually reviewed for the timely treatment of tooth decay measure, with measure performance of sensitivity 97%, specificity 85%, positive predictive value (PPV) 91%, negative predictive value (NPV) 95%. About 739 charts were reviewed for new decay measure, with sensitivity 94%, specificity 99%, PPV 99%, and NPV 94%. Across all sites and years, 52.8% of patients with decay were fully treated within 6 months of diagnosis (n = 247,959). A total of 23.8% of patients experienced new decay, measured at an annual exam (n = 640,004).
conclusionMethods were developed and validated for assessing timely treatment of decay and occurrence of new decay derived from EHR data, creating effective outcome measures. These EHR-based quality measures produce accurate and reliable results that support efforts and advancement in quality assessment, quality improvement, patient care and research.
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.