ArticleOral diseases2025
The Dental Status of Patients Taking Common Biologic Agents: A Single-Center Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Oral diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDespite expanding use and medical applications, little is known about the impact of biologic agents (BAs) on dental treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the dental status of patients on common classes of BAs to understand treatment needs and use in this population.
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on patients treated with the most common classes of BA (tumor necrosis factor-alpha [TNF-α] inhibitors, interleukin (IL) inhibitors, and lymphocyte modulators) from 1/7/2017 to 1/7/2022. Data on demographic factors, BA treatment, medical conditions including indication, restorative and periodontal treatments, and decayed, missing, and filled tooth index (DMFT) were compared descriptively.
resultsThe study identified 247 patients treated with 24 different BAs. Restorative and periodontal treatment was completed on 60.3% and 72.9% of patients, respectively. The DMFT scores were higher in the study cohort compared to the average US adult population. The analysis revealed an upward trend in both periodontal and restorative treatments.
conclusionsThis study provides the first comprehensive characterization of the oral health status and treatment needs of patients taking BAs. The findings suggest a higher dental treatment burden in this population, particularly regarding restorative care in this population, a finding that may be confirmed or expanded in future evaluations.
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.