ArticleCureus2024
The Use of Informed Consent in Endodontic Treatment in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-reported gaps in use and quality of informed consent practices in dental care in Saudi Arabia: a regional cross-sectional survey.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Navigating Endodontic Care: Perspectives Among Dentists Managing Older Adults-A Qualitative Study.Australian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInformed consent is a legal process intended to protect patients' rights and ensure ethical medical practice. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to assess dentists' practice of obtaining informed consent and adherence to the recommended guidelines, and to investigate the types of consent, barriers, the process, and the quality of the information included in preoperative informed consent for endodontic treatment in Saudi Arabia.
methodsA validated self-administered online questionnaire was developed and distributed to dentists performing endodontic treatment in Saudi Arabia. Data were collected using a snowball sampling technique for three months (May to July).
resultsOf the 452 participants included in the study, 79.4% (n = 359) obtained informed consent, and 63.5% of them followed the recommended guidelines. Dentists with over 10 years of experience used informed consent regularly (p < .005). The main barrier to obtaining informed consent was the lack of a standardized format (28.5%). Furthermore, only 36.3% of the participants obtained written informed consent. Most participants (75.4%, n = 341) reported that they discuss and disclose information about the treatment to patients themselves. Less than 5% of participants include all listed criteria in their consent process.
conclusionAlthough obtaining informed consent prior to endodontic treatment was a broadly adopted process among the participants, their practice appears to be inadequate. Issues such as the type and quality of informed consent need to be improved through educational and awareness programs and strict implementation by responsible authorities.
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.