ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Clinical Practice for Tooth Wear: A Literature Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Item generation for a tooth wear-specific patient-reported outcome measure.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Article
- A novel method for constructing a rat multifactorial tooth wear model: accurate, inexpensive, and easily established.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Dental Patients' Loyalty and Experiences with Staff/Systems in a Tertiary Hospital.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Psychometric Properties of the Five-Item Ultrashort Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP5) in the Serbian Cultural Environment: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tooth wear is a growing oral health concern with implications for function, esthetics, and psychological well-being, ultimately affecting oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). While clinical indices assess tooth wear severity, they fail to capture patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). This narrative review aims to identify and synthesize the use of PROs and PROMs used in adults with tooth wear and to map their assessed domains against the Wilson and Cleary model of health outcomes, highlighting gaps and guiding the development of condition-specific instruments. A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted across PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase. Studies involving PROMs in adults with tooth wear were included. Extracted data encompassed psychometric properties and domains assessed. PROMs such as the OHIP, OES, OIDP, and QMFQ have been frequently used, focusing on functional limitation, esthetic perception, and psychological distress. However, no single instrument comprehensively addresses all relevant domains of the Wilson and Cleary model. Moreover, variation in tools and constructs limits comparability across studies and clinical settings. Existing PROMs capture only partial aspects of the patient experience related to tooth wear. When mapping these instruments to a validated theoretical model, significant gaps become evident, especially in terms of general health perceptions and overall quality of life metrics. To improve the evaluation and management of tooth wear in clinical settings, it is essential to create a condition-specific PROM based on a solid conceptual framework.
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.