Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40087447›Full record

ArticleBritish dental journal2025

The ethics of community water fluoridation: Part 2 - how has the ethics of community water fluoridation been appraised in the literature? A scoping review.

Bhavini Patel, Thomas Anthony Dyer

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in British dental journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Bhavini PatelDental Practitioner and Alumnus, School of Clinical Dentistry, University of Sheffield, 19 Claremont Crescent, Sheffield, S10 2TA, UK.
Thomas Anthony DyerSenior Clinical Teacher, School of Clinical Dentistry, University of Sheffield, 19 Claremont Crescent, Sheffield, S10 2TA, UK. t.dyer@sheffield.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim To examine how the ethics of community water fluoridation has been appraised in the literature.Method A scoping review using an updated Arksey and O'Malley framework. Six electronic databases were searched: Medline via OVID; Scopus; Web of Science; Cochrane Library; StarPlus and Google Scholar. Grey literature and reference lists of included studies were also searched.Results In total, 51 studies from 15 countries were included. Many referred to biomedical ethical principles intended for clinical rather than public health interventions. Some primarily aimed to appraise its ethics whereas others considered it as part of more general discussions on fluoridation. While most acknowledged its complexity, those more supportive of fluoridation often emphasised collective benefit and those less supportive emphasised infringement of autonomy or personal liberty and concerns about harm. Few referred to public health ethics principles and frameworks available in the literature.Conclusion Different approaches have been taken to appraise the ethics of fluoridation. Frequently, these were conceived for individual medical rather than public health interventions and are inadequate to resolve tension between inevitable infringement of individual consent and collective benefit in public health. Other approaches conceived specifically for public health exist that have more utility in debates and ethical decision-making.

Indexed as

FluoridationHumansPublic Health

Identifiers

PMID40087447
PMCPMC11908968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.