ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
Patients' Preferences for the Treatment of a Single Missing Tooth in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Public preferences for preventative dental care: a discrete choice experiment in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The main treatment options offered to patients to choose from when restoring a single missing tooth include tooth-supported three-unit fixed partial dentures (FPDs) and implant-supported single crowns (ISCs). However, due to the heterogeneity of current studies, it is difficult to objectively compare these two treatment strategies. In this study, a discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to quantify the preferences of individuals undergoing restoration treatment for single tooth loss. Patients and Methods: The DCE questionnaire was disseminated in a "snowball" fashion, with data collected from participants aged 18-60. Five important attributes of treatment were selected: (1) treatment procedure, (2) treatment time, (3) cost, (4) five-year survival rate, and (5) five-year complication rate. A conditional logit model was employed to ascertain the direction of participants' preferences for specific attribute levels and to derive their willingness to pay (WTP) through the principle of marginal utility. Results: 287 participants completed the questionnaire. The results of the questionnaire revealed that the five-year complication rate (42.42%) was the most important attribute, followed by cost (20.43%), five-year survival rate (14.23%), treatment time (13.44%), and treatment procedure (9.49%). Participants were willing to pay RMB$11076.2 (USD$1,772.2) to obtain a 10% extra reduction in the five-year complication rate, and RMB$7434.6 (USD$1,189.5) for a non-invasive treatment. Conclusion: In the ranking of the relative importance of key factors affecting single missing tooth restoration, complication rates are most highly valued, suggesting that reducing the complication rate is a key issue to be addressed in prosthodontics. In addition, deriving the ranking of patients' concerns about key factors can help to improve doctor-patient communication and provide a reference for treatment technology development and medical decision-making.
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.