Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39028748›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

A cross-sectional study of physicians on fluoride-related beliefs and practices, and experiences with fluoride-hesitant caregivers.

Tiffany Bass, Courtney M Hill, Jennifer L Cully, Sophie R Li, Donald L Chi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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. Review
  2. 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

5 authors.

Tiffany BassDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Courtney M HillDepartment of Oral Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Jennifer L CullyDivision of Oral Health, Children's National Hospital, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Sophie R LiDepartment of Oral Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0009-0005-4953-8973
Donald L ChiDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2289-7747

Funding

Developing Topical Fluoride Hesitancy Measures for Causal Modeling and Intervention ResearchR01DE026741 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI CHI, DONALD LESLIE · 2018 to 2021
$1.7M
NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE026741
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of this study was to describe medical providers' fluoride-related beliefs and practices, experiences with fluoride-hesitant caregivers, and barriers to incorporating oral health activities into their practice. In this cross-sectional study, we specifically tested the hypothesis of whether these factors differed between pediatric and family medicine providers. A 39-item online survey was administered to a convenience sample of pediatric and family medicine providers in Washington state and Ohio (U.S.A.). Responses to the fluoride survey were compared between pediatric and family medicine providers with a chi-square test (α = 0.05). Of the 354 study participants, 45% were pediatric providers and 55% were family medicine providers. About 61.9% of providers believed fluoridated water was highly effective at preventing tooth decay while only 29.1% believed prescription fluoride supplements were highly effective. Nearly all providers recommend over-the-counter fluoride toothpaste (87.3%), 44.1% apply topical fluoride in clinic, and 30.8% prescribe fluoride supplements. Most providers reported fluoride hesitancy was a small problem or not a problem (82.5%) and the most common concerns patients raise about fluoride were similar to those raised about vaccines. Lack of time was the most commonly reported barrier to incorporating oral health into practice, which was more commonly reported by family medicine providers than pediatric providers (65.6% vs. 50.3%; p = .005). Pediatric and family medicine providers have early and frequent access to children before children visit a dentist. Improving the use of fluorides through children's medical visits could improve pediatric oral health and reduce oral health inequities, especially for vulnerable populations at increased risk for tooth decay.

Indexed as

CaregiversFluoridesAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDental CariesFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedOhioOral HealthPhysiciansPractice Patterns, Physicians'Surveys and QuestionnairesWashingtonFluorides

Identifiers

PMID39028748
PMCPMC11259263

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.