ArticleBMC medical education2025
Comparison of knowledge and esthetic perception regarding gingival pigmentation between students from different non-dentistry health profession programs.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the degree of knowledge of gingival melanosis between professionals and students: observational and cross-sectional study.Frontiers in oral health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the knowledge of non-dental health profession students regarding the etiology and management of gingival pigmentation, and determine the ability of health professions students in different disciplines to assess levels of gingival pigmentation when they viewed intraoral clinical photographs of patients.
methodsA cross-sectional, pre-tested, and validated survey was conducted among non-dental health professional students to assess knowledge. Visual perception was evaluated using a collection of intraoral clinical images classified according to the Dummett-Gupta Oral Pigmentation index (DOPI) and a visual analog scale. Statistical significance was set at the 5% level.
resultsThere were no significant differences based on nationality or sex in knowledge of the causes and treatment of gingival pigmentation. However, significant differences were observed among students from different health professions educational programs. Moreover, students' visual assessment of clinical cases varied in comparison to the actual DOPI scores assigned by experienced clinicians, possibly because of their subjective visual perception of esthetics.
conclusionsAlthough the students demonstrated reasonable comprehension of the etiology of gingival pigmentation, their knowledge of treatment options was limited. Visual pigmentation assessment saw individual variations depending on cultural background and societal acceptance. The findings of this study provide insights into the subjectivity of perception of gingival pigmentation, which varies among individuals in reference to a validated categorical classification.
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.