ReviewHealth science reports2025
Analyzing Nonpharmacological Behavior Management in Children With Dental Anxiety: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Health science reports, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Dental anxiety in children is a prevalent concern that affects compliance and treatment outcomes in pediatric dentistry. Nonpharmacological behavioral interventions (NPBI), including virtual reality (VR) and tell-show-do (TSD), are commonly used to manage dental anxiety. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions in reducing anxiety and pain perception in pediatric dental patients. Methods: Following PRISMA-2020 guidelines, a comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science was conducted until April 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NPBIs to controls in children undergoing dental procedures were included, focusing on changes in dental anxiety and pain. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, with standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) calculated for anxiety and pain outcomes. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using I² and Cochran's Q test. Results: Of 2,957 records, 76 RCTs with 6,723 participants were included. Distraction techniques did not significantly reduce dental anxiety compared to Tell-Show-Do (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.71 to 0.04) but were effective in reducing pain (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.76 to -0.10). Virtual Reality (VR) distraction showed no significant reduction in anxiety or pain compared to traditional techniques. Conclusion: While certain distraction techniques may alleviate pain, their impact on anxiety is comparable to that of traditional methods such as TSD. Despite this innovative approach, VR distraction did not demonstrate superiority over traditional techniques in reducing anxiety or pain.
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.