ArticleBMC oral health2025
Investigation of Entamoeba gingivalis and Trichomonas tenax in gingivitis and periodontitis patients.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microscopic Detection ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- The association between Trichomonas tenax and Entamoeba gingivalis and periimplantitis and periodontitis.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim was to determine the prevalence of Entamoeba gingivalis and Trichomonas tenax in periodontitis and gingivitis patients and their distribution according to some risk factors.
methodsThe study was conducted on a total of 120 people, including 40 patients with periodontitis, 40 patients with gingivitis, and 40 healthy individuals as a control group. Scraping samples taken from mandibular right incisal region, maxillary right sulcus region and maxillary right palatal cervical regions were examined under a light microscope for E. gingivalis and T. tenax.
resultsPrevalence of E. gingivalis and T. tenax among all individuals was 44.2% and 5.5%, respectively. The prevalence of E. gingivalis and T. tenax among gingivitis patients was 47.5% and 7.5%, respectively, while in the control group both parasites were detected in 5% of the individuals with no statistical difference (P > 0.05). The prevalence of E. gingivalis and T. tenax with periodontitis patients and control groups was 80%, 10% and 20%, 3.8% respectively. Statistically significant difference was determined among these groups (P < 0.05). While E. gingivalis and T. tenax were found in 51%, 8.8% in patients with gingivitis and periodontitis, their prevalence in the control group was 5%, 0% respectively. A statistically significant difference among groups for the presence of E. gingivalis was observed (P < 0.05), while the difference among groups for T.tenax was no significant (P > 0.05). No significant relationship between the presence of E. gingivalis or T.tenax and oral location was detected.
conclusionsThe study indicated that both E. gingivalis and T. tenax were significantly more prevalent in individuals with periodontitis and gingivitis compared to the healthy controls, while demographic factors such as age, gender, and educational level showed no significant association with the presence of these protozoa.
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.