ArticlePLOS digital health2024
Afraid of the dentist? There's an app for that: Development and usability testing of a cognitive behavior therapy-based mobile app.
Article in PLOS digital health, 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.
- Examining barriers and facilitators of dental fear treatment adoption: A qualitative study of practicing dentists.PloS one · 2025Article
- A Pre-Adoption Assessment of a Collaborative Care Approach to Dental-Fear Treatment.Oral (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAlthough several brief cognitive behavior therapy (CBT)-based treatments for dental fear have proven efficacious, these interventions remain largely unavailable outside of the specialty clinics in which they were developed. Leveraging technology, we sought to increase access to treatment for individuals with dental fear through the development of a mobile application (Dental FearLess). MATERIALS AND
methodsTo assess the resonance of our app as an avenue for dental fear treatment, we conducted a study assessing the usability, feasibility, and acceptability of the beta app. Participants with moderate to severe dental fear (N = 80) completed the app and reported on the perceived usability of the mobile interface (Systems Usability Scale, SUS; α = .82) and credibility of the intervention (Credibility and Expectancy Questionnaire, CEQ; α = .88). A sub-sample of participants naïve to the app (n = 10) completed the app during a think-aloud procedure, sharing their candid thoughts and reactions while using the app, prior to reporting on usability and credibility metrics.
resultsOverall usability (M = 78.5, SD = 17.7) and credibility (M = 21.7, SD = 5.5) of the beta version of the app were good. The think-aloud data further corroborated the app's acceptability, while highlighting several areas for user improvement (i.e., aesthetics, navigation, engagement).
conclusionsUsability and acceptability results are promising for the viability of an accessible, feasible, self-administered intervention for dental fear. Refinements made based on user feedback have produced a clinical-trial-ready mobile application. App refinement decisions, informed by user feedback, are representative of the larger literature-that is, of the ubiquitous negotiations m-health developers must make across treatment fidelity, usability, and engagement. Implications for future research are discussed.
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.