Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38376433›Full record

SynthesisOral health & preventive dentistry2024

Cariogenic Diet Assessment and Analysis Tools in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review.

Matina V Angelopoulou, Kyriaki Seremidi, Vasiliki Benetou, Andreas Agouropoulos, Christos Rahiotis, Sotiria Gizani

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Oral health & preventive dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Cariogenic Dietary Assessment Using a Mobile App in Children.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2025
    Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Matina V Angelopoulou
Kyriaki Seremidi
Vasiliki Benetou
Andreas Agouropoulos
Christos Rahiotis
Sotiria Gizani

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo collect and evaluate the available evidence on existing tools used in research and clinical practice to assess and analyse the diet of children and adolescents for its cariogenicity. MATERIALS AND

methodsMultiple databases were searched up to October 2022, with no date, publication, or language restrictions, followed by a manual search. Study screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed in duplicate. Dietary assessment tools and dental clinical parameters tested were retrieved for qualitative assessment and synthesis.

resultsOf the 2896 papers identified, 9 cohort and 23 cross-sectional studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. To assess dietary data, 13 studies used a 24-h recall, 11 used a food diary, and 7 used a food frequency questionnaire. For analysis, five studies reported using the Healthy Eating Index, ten used a score based on consumption of sugars, and the remaining analysed cariogenic diet based on the weight and frequency of sugars consumed, or the daily caloric intake from free sugars. Risk of bias assessment suggested that 65.7% of the studies were of moderate and 31.5% of high quality.

conclusionInconsistency exists regarding methods used for the assessment and analysis of dietary cariogenicity. Although every dietary assessment tool has different strengths and limitations, the 24-h recall was the most commonly used method for the assessment of dietary cariogenicity and the most consistent in detecting a positive relationship between sugary diet and carious lesions. A standardised method for cariogenic analysis of dietary data needs to be determined.

Indexed as

Diet, CariogenicAdolescentChildDental CariesDiet RecordsHumans24-h recallcariogenic dietdietary assessment toolsfood diary

Identifiers

PMID38376433
PMCPMC11619880

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.