Trial reportBMC oral health2025
Effectiveness of edutainment use in video-based learning on oral health education for school-age children: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correction: Effectiveness of edutainment use in videobased learning on oral health education for school-age children: a randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Student Perceptions of the School eHealth Education Program Pakistan (eSHEPP): A Qualitative Study of Acceptability, Feasibility, and Awareness of Non-Communicable Diseases.Research square · 2026Article
- Quality and guideline adherence of child-oriented toothbrushing videos on YouTube: a comparative study of Turkish and English content.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Video-Assisted Learning for Oral Health Knowledge in Children: A Pre-post Intervention Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- Comparative effectiveness of culturally adapted oral health education in rural Quechua-speaking schoolchildren: a cluster quasi-experimental study.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of a Novel Oral Health Tracker cum Motivator Versus Conventional Education on Oral Health Behavior Among 10- to 15-Year-Old School Children in Lucknow: A Single-Blinded, Parallel Design-A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEntertainment platforms have become more popular among children since the COVID-19 outbreak. The entertainment designed for education; "edutainment" could be a promising learning tool on oral health education (OHE). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of edutainment use for OHE in school-age children.
methodsA total of 210 students (age range 9.2-10.8 years) were included. The three-arm parallel randomized controlled trial was conducted in three schools, receiving the same contents of OHE with different learning methods; classroom learning (CL), edutainment in video-based learning with and without repetition at a three-month follow-up (EVBL and EVBL-R). The knowledge, behavior, behavioral intention score, and oral health (OH) status; visble plaue (VPI) and gingival index (GI) were evaluated at baseline, immediate post-intervention, 3, and 6 months. Differences within and between groups for knowledge scores and OH status were analyzed by repeated measures and one-way ANOVA, respectively, and for both behavior and behavioral intention scores, Friedman's two-way analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis test were analyzed, respectively, at a significant level of 0.05.
resultsThe knowledge score was significantly higher in CL for two out of three content domains (p = 0.01, p < 0.001) yet immediately improved within all groups (p < 0.001) with the range of 26.58-53.35% vs. 4.12-29.77% of both EVBLs. No significant difference was found in the behavior and behavioral intention scores among groups. EVBL and EVBL-R had significantly improved behavior scores throughout their follow-ups (p = 0.017, p = 0.006) with the range of 1.19-28.13% vs. 1.90-15.16% of CL and had a significant improvement for VPI (p < 0.001) or 32.5-57.08% vs. 36.45-38.79% of CL. There was no significant difference in GI, but it significantly improved only within the EVBL-R group after the repetition.
conclusionEVBL was comparable to the CL in encouraging positive behaviors, while the CL was preferable for providing core knowledge. EVBL was more applicable to how-to content, and the repetition at least every three months might be able to promote a better OH status.
trial registrationThe trial was registered in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry under the number TCTR20240816001 on 16/08/2024 (retrospective registration).
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.