ReviewNigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association
Knowledge and awareness of dental professionals regarding Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII) in India- A systematic review.
Review in Nigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In recent times, patients have become more aware of their rights, and this has led to significant rise in the compensation cases against doctors. Due to the nature of the work and costs involved in the treatment, dental professionals are at high risk of facing such medical negligence cases. Therefore, the present study was conducted to assess knowledge and awareness regarding professional indemnity insurance (PII) among dental professionals in India. Methodology: A systematic review of relevant cross-sectional observational studies was conducted among dental professionals in India to report their knowledge and awareness regarding PII. Eight studies out of 98 were finally included in the review after conducting both electronic and manual search of scientific databases and making necessary exclusions. Potential biases were addressed and relevant data regarding PII data was extracted by the investigators concerned. Results: More than 60% of subjects had knowledge regarding PII in one of the study reports. Only 0.5% of subjects had taken PII in one of the studies and merely 8% in the other study. One of the studies mentioned that 76.2% of subjects paid compensation to their patients for negligence during dental treatment. Main hurdles for not opting PII were unawareness and considering PII non-mandatory for dentists. More than 90% of subjects in one study showed interest in buying PII for themselves. Conclusion: The results of the present review reveal that less than half of the subjects in some studies reported a lack of knowledge regarding PII and very few had taken PII. Therefore, there is an urgent need to make dental professionals aware of the benefits of obtaining PII to safeguard themselves from various litigation issues.
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.