Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36554052›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Opinions of Prospective Dentists and Prospective Teachers on Antibiotic Use.

Seyda Gul, Pinar Gul

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Seyda GulKazım Karabekir Faculty of Education, Ataturk University, Erzurum 25240, Turkey.
Pinar GulDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Atatürk University, Erzurum 25240, Turkey.
Atatürk University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the opinions of prospective dentists and prospective teachers on antibiotic use. In this study, a survey method based on a quantitative research paradigm was utilized. A 19-item instrument was applied to the sample group including 414 university students attending to the Faculty of Dentistry and Faculty of Education. The instrument was composed of three main subscales in addition to demographic characteristics. The first part focused on attitudes, the second part focused on subjective norms, and the third part focused on the prospective dentists and prospective teachers' intentions regarding the phenomenon of antibiotics use. While the dependent variables of the study were the participants' levels of agreement in the subscales of the instrument, the independent variable was faculty studied. The data were analyzed through descriptive statistics, and the Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the participants' views on antibiotic use. The findings in terms of the faculties showed that dentistry and education faculties in our country prepare well in expanding their reasonable consumption of antibiotics. Yet, antibiotics are used more incorrectly by some prospective teachers than by prospective dentists. According to the findings in terms of subscales, the participants have positive attitudes toward the reasonable use of antibiotics in terms of the attitude subscale. However, the results from the subjective norm indicated that participants are influenced by their environment in their antibiotic use. Finally, the results from the intention indicated that participants avoid using antibiotics irregularly or frequently.

Indexed as

antibioticsuniversity studentunreasonable consumption

Identifiers

PMID36554052
PMCPMC9778572
OpenAlexW4311391079

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.