ArticleCureus2023
Assessment of Arabic Web-Based Knowledge About Clear Aligners: An Infodemiologic Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessment of the Arabic patient-centered online information about orthodontic pain: A quality and readability assessment.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Assessment of Quality and Readability of Online Patient-Centered Arabic Web-Based Knowledge About Apicoectomy.Cureus · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOrthodontic treatments aim to enhance dental aesthetics, functionality, and long-term oral health. Clear aligners have gained popularity as an aesthetic and convenient option for patients seeking orthodontic correction. However, the quality and readability of online Arabic patient-centered information regarding clear aligners has not been studied yet. The aim of our study is to investigate the quality and readability of Arabic patient-centered information about clear aligners.
methodsWe conducted an extensive evaluation of Arabic web-based content pertaining to clear aligners using three prominent search engines. Eligible websites were categorized based on specialization, organizational affiliation, material type, and presentation style. We assessed website quality and reliability using the DISCERN instrument, Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, and Health on the Net (HON) code. In addition, we measured readability using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Simplified Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL).
resultsOut of 600 search results, 195 websites met the inclusion criteria. None of the websites were HON-code accredited. DISCERN assessments revealed low content quality, with none of the websites achieving high-quality status. The JAMA benchmarks showed limited compliance with the four items, with currency being the most frequently achieved. Readability assessments indicated generally high readability, with FKGL scores suggesting easy comprehension for the average readers.
conclusionWhile Arabic web-based information on clear aligners is highly readable, its credibility and quality require significant improvement. Websites should adhere to medical information standards, subject content to rigorous assessments, and seek accreditation to ensure reliability. Enhancing the accessibility and comprehensibility of health-related content will empower individuals to make informed health decisions. Addressing limitations, such as social media and video content evaluation, and conducting comparisons with English websites in future research will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the landscape of online orthodontic information.
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.