ReviewCureus2023
A Comparative Review of Water Flossers in Periodontal Therapy.
Review 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.
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.
- The effects of using water flosser versus interdental brush on gingival health in patients with mandibular bonded retainer - a randomized controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Effects of daily home-use water flossing as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontal therapy in the treatment of stage I-II periodontitis: a 6-month randomized controlled trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Trial
- Oral hygiene practices and oral health outcomes among older adults in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
- Depression, Functional Dependence, and Oral Health: Evidence from a Clinical Study of Older Spanish Adults.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
This study investigated the efficacy of water flossers (WFs), devices used to irrigate the interdental and subgingival areas, compared to other interdental care methods, in the management of periodontal disease. A computerized PubMed search was conducted by the author, encompassing the years 1962 to 2023. The year 1962 was selected due to it being the introduction of the first WF. Keywords included "oral irrigator", "efficacy," and "water flossers." The review provided a broad comparative assessment of WFs, rather than an exhaustive detailed article review. We discussed the history and evolution of commercially available WFs and introduced a novel classification system. The research also evaluated the performance of WFs in comparison to traditional and novel interdental care methods, focusing on crucial clinical parameters such as plaque removal efficiency and reduction in gingival inflammation. The results of the study reveal that WFs appear to be superior in the management of periodontal disease and have demonstrated effectiveness in a variety of indices. However, it's worth noting that the author did not statistically analyze any of the data. We identified gaps in the literature and found opportunities for further clinical studies. These findings hold implications for optimal periodontal disease prevention and management, addressing the evolving landscape of oral care practices.
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.