ArticlePloS one2023
Patients' preferences in dental care: A discrete-choice experiment and an analysis of willingness-to-pay.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decision-making regarding dental treatments - What factors matter from patients' perspective? A systematic review.BMC oral health · 2025Pooled it
- Experiences and Parents' Perceptions Regarding Dental Interventions Performed on Their Children: A Qualitative Systematic Review.International journal of paediatric dentistry · 2025Pooled it
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Patient preferences and willingness to pay for dental services: a systematic review.BMC oral health · 2025Pooled it
- YouTube™ as an information source for non-surgical root canal retreatment: quality and content analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- What influences individual preferences for responsiveness in oral health services? A discrete choice experiment in Türkiye.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Calculating willingness-to-pay with discrete cost and random coefficients in discrete choice experiments.Health economics review · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes and preferences of parents/guardians regarding dental treatment of their children's primary teeth: a questionnaire cross-sectional study.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2025Article
- Self-Reported Oral Health-Related Quality of Life and Orofacial Esthetics Among Young Adults With Treated Dental Trauma.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025Article
- Optimisation of services to prevent dental caries for school-aged children in China: a discrete choice experiment.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Insights and networks: methodological assessment and scientometric analysis of economic evaluations in dentistry.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Patients' reasons for consulting a general practitioner at the time of having dental problems: a qualitative study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Quantum mechanical analysis of yttrium-stabilized zirconia and alumina: implications for mechanical performance of esthetic crowns.European journal of medical research · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDental diseases are a major problem worldwide. Costs are a burden on healthcare systems and patients. Missed treatments can have health and financial consequences. Compared to other health services, dental treatments are only covered in parts by statutory health insurance (SHI). Using the example of dental crowns for a cost-intensive treatment, our study aims to investigate whether (1) certain treatment attributes determine patients' treatment choice, and (2) out-of-pocket payments represent a barrier to access dental care.
methodsWe conducted a discrete-choice-experiment by mailing questionnaires to 10,752 people in Germany. In presented scenarios the participants could choose between treatment options (A, B, or none) composed of treatment attribute levels (e.g., color of teeth) for posterior (PT) and anterior teeth (AT). Considering interaction effects, we used a D-efficient fractional factorial design. Choice analysis was performed using different models. Furthermore, we analyzed willingness-to-pay (WTP), preference of choosing no and SHI standard care treatment, and influence of socioeconomic characteristics on individual WTP.
resultsOut of n = 762 returned questionnaires (response rate of r = 7.1), n = 380 were included in the analysis. Most of the participants are in age group "50 to 59 years" (n = 103, 27.1%) and female (n = 249, 65.5%). The participants' benefit allocations varied across treatment attributes. Aesthetics and durability of dental crowns play most important roles in decision-making. WTP regarding natural color teeth is higher than standard SHI out-of-pocket payment. Estimations for AT dominate. For both tooth areas, "no treatment" was a frequent choice (PT: 25.7%, AT: 37.2%). Especially for AT, treatment beyond SHI standard care was often chosen (49.8%, PT: 31.3%). Age, gender, and incentive measures (bonus booklet) influenced WTP per participant.
conclusionThis study provides important insights into patient preferences for dental crown treatment in Germany. For our participants, aesthetic for AT and PT as well as out-of-pocket payments for PT play an important role in decision-making. Overall, they are willing to pay more than the current out-of-pockt payments for what they consider to be better crown treatments. Findings may be valuable for policy makers in developing measures that better match patient preferences.
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.