ArticleGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2025
[Early dental visits - a systematic analysis of the information content of national dental child health records].
Article in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Early prevention from the first tooth - what do German dental homepages recommend?BMC oral health · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dental child health records have an informal character and act as a reminder of early dental visits (FU1a-c, FUPr, FLA). Long-term prevention should take place from newborns to the age of 6. However, each chamber area (n=17) has its own dental child health record (n=14). The evaluation of the formalities and the content was the aim of this study.Fourteen dental child health records were evaluated by 12 dentists with different specializations (2 each in pediatric dentistry, periodontics, prosthetics, tooth preservation, orthodontics, no specialization) from July 1st, 2023 - November 30th, 2023. The dentists used a catalogue of criteria with 81 items. The validated criteria catalogue consisted of questions about quality (Witten List, DISCERN, Hamburg Model of Comprehensibility) and other relevant topics. A descriptive analysis and statistical evaluations (Kruskal-Wallis test, asymptomatic significance test), a correlation analysis of the quality of patient information (Spearman correlation), a binary logistic regression analysis of the variables specialization of the examiner (in pediatric dentistry/not in pediatric dentistry), gender (female/male), professional experience (≤7 years/>7 years) and chamber area (eastern/western chamber areas) were carried out.The dental child health record from Bremen/Schleswig-Holstein (identical) was rated best in terms of content median (25%/75% percentile): 100.50(100.00/101.75), the dental child health record of Brandenburg was rated the worst 69, 00(66.50/73.00); p>1.00). There was good correlation between DISCERN and the Hamburg Model of Comprehensibility (ρ=0.565 (p<0.001)). According to the regression analysis, only the chamber area showed a significant influence on the content (p<0.001).There was a strong discrepancy in the quality and quantity of the dental child health records. It is important to strive towards a standardized form and congruence in content similar to that which already exists for the children's medical examination booklets.
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.