ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024
Forensically Valuable Odonatological Records Documentation in an Era of Electronics: How Aware Are the Dental Fraternity?
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Forensic odontology plays a pivotal role in the identification of victims in mass disasters with the help of "Preserved dental records" available to general dental practitioners (GDPs). Comparison of dental data obtained from the deceased person with dental data obtained by the dentist from the person's file is a primary method of identification through dental evidence. Aim: We explored the practice of maintaining dental records among GDPs, as well as their knowledge of legal regulations and the application of dental records in forensic odontology. Materials and Method: Two hundred fifty dentists participated in an online survey. Questions covered general information on dentists, maintenance of dental records, and knowledge of legal requirements and forensic odontology. Results: Overall, 85.2% of dentists obtain and archive written informed consent, while 73.2% retain records in the form of dental cast. Generally, non-carious dental lesions and developmental dental anomalies were not recorded. About 90.8% of dentists use Fédération Dentaire Internationale (FDI) notation. Conclusion: The survey revealed different practices in the maintenance of dental records, including significant flaws and a lack of awareness of their forensic importance. This obvious need for additional education on the proper maintenance of dental records could be met by including forensic odontology in compulsory undergraduate courses and postgraduate dental education. Establishing national and international standards in dental charting would comply with contemporary trends in health care and the requirements of forensic expertise.
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.