ArticleFrontiers in dental medicine2025
Impact of knowledge of the 2017 classification for periodontal and peri-implant diseases on diagnostic accuracy among dental students.
Article in Frontiers in dental medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Periodontal diseases are a significant global health problem and have been associated with various systemic diseases. The American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) and the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP) introduced a new classification system for periodontal and peri-implant diseases in 2017. However, the complexity of this new classification has presented some challenges in its implementation compared to the 1999 classification system. This study evaluates the impact of dental students' knowledge of the 2017 classification on their ability to diagnose periodontal diseases accurately. Materials and methods: This cross-sectional study enrolled 146 fifth- and sixth-year dental students from King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. A self-reported questionnaire was employed to assess students' knowledge of the 2017 periodontal classification system and their diagnostic abilities across five clinical cases. Students were classified into low, moderate, and high knowledge groups based on their knowledge questionnaire scores. Statistical analyses assessed the relationship between classification knowledge and diagnostic accuracy and compared these measures across different groups. Results: In the study, 41.10% of participants achieved high knowledge scores (14-16 correct answers), while 32.88% and 26.03% were categorized into moderate and low knowledge groups, respectively. There was no significant association between knowledge levels and diagnostic accuracy, except for one specific clinical case. While sixth-year students scored significantly higher in the knowledge assessment than fifth-year students ( Conclusion: This study found no significant impact of dental students' knowledge of the 2017 periodontal classification system on diagnostic accuracy. Challenges such as discrepancies between case complexity and clinical experience and teaching inconsistencies underscore the need for enhanced clinical simulations, case-based learning, and targeted educational training to improve diagnostic accuracy and clinical competence.
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.