ArticleBritish dental journal2024
Prevention of infective endocarditis in at-risk patients: how should dentists proceed in 2024?
Article in British dental journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oral Health and Dental Management of Children With Down Syndrome: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- An important change in infective endocarditis prevention guidance.British dental journal · 2026Article
- Infective Endocarditis: A Contemporary Review of Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Management.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The role of dental assessment in source identification duringFrontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Contamination-controlled upper gastrointestinal microbiota profiling reveals salivary-duodenal community types linked to opportunistic pathogen carriage and inflammation.Gut microbes · 2025Article
- Necessity of dental restoration before heart valve replacement: a cross-sectional study of a historical cohort.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Non-surgical endodontic management for the medically complex - hints and tips for the general dental practitioner.British dental journal · 2025Article
- New evidence calls into question NICE's endocarditis prevention guidance.British dental journal · 2024Article
- Exploring links between oral health and infective endocarditis.Frontiers in oral health · 2024Review
- Beyond antibiotic prophylaxis: A scoping review of infective endocarditis prevention in the device era.International journal of immunopathology and pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines are ambiguous over the need for patients at increased risk of infective endocarditis (IE) to receive antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) prior to invasive dental procedures (IDPs), and this has caused confusion for patients and dentists alike. Moreover, the current law on consent requires clinicians to ensure that patients are made aware of any material risk they might be exposed to by any proposed dental treatment and what can be done to ameliorate this risk, so that the patient can decide for themselves how they wish to proceed. The aim of this article is to provide dentists with the latest information on the IE-risk posed by IDPs to different patient populations (the general population and those defined as being at moderate or high risk of IE), and data on the effectiveness of AP in reducing the IE risk in these populations. This provides the information dentists need to facilitate the informed consent discussions they are legally required to have with patients at increased risk of IE about the risks posed by IDPs and how this can be minimised. The article also provides practical information and advice for dentists on how to manage patients at increased IE risk who present for dental treatment.
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.