ArticleBMC oral health2025
The use of magnification in endodontic treatments by endodontists: results of a questionnaire.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. 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.
- Implementing Deflection Loupes in Endodontic Training of General Dentistry Residents: Effects on Treatment Quality, Procedure Time and Ergonomics.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Trial
- Contemporary endodontic practices among endodontic specialists in Saudi Arabia: a comparative cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the study to investigate the accessibility and frequency of use of magnification systems in endodontics and to evaluate the economic and logistical factors.
methodsA survey comprising of 34 questions, created in Survey Monkey, was sent to 874 clinicians. The survey consisted of three main sections: demographic information, the use of magnification systems, and financial factors. Descriptive analysis and chi-square tests were performed.
resultsOf the participants, 42.3% were endodontists, and 57.7% were postgraduate students in endodontics. Nearly 26.1%, 32.7%, and 41.1% reported using a dental operating microscope (DOM), a loupe, and no magnification system, respectively. When asked how long it would take to recoup the cost of the DOM, considering additional charges or patient preferences, the most common response (40%) was 1-2 years.
conclusionAlthough the use of magnification systems has become quite widespread today, it is important to increase their use further. The procurement and use of DOMs have not created a long-term financial burden for clinicians.
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.