ArticleBMC oral health2025
Evaluation of patients' knowledge and awareness of the harmful effects of radiation at two dental faculties: a questionnaire-based study.
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.
- A questionnaire study on dental radiation knowledge and anxiety among patients applying to a faculty of dentistry.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Dental Radiophobia: A Narrative Review of Prevalence, Associated Factors, and Public Health Consequences of Dental Radiography Fear in the Community - With a Focus on Both Patient and Clinician-Level Fear.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2026Review
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 of this study is to evaluate the knowledge levels of patients who present to the dentist for diagnostic or treatment purposes regarding the radiation dose of radiological examinations used in dentistry, the harmful effects of radiation, and protective measures against radiation.
methodsA total of 402 adult participants (228 female, 174 male) who presented to the Departments of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology at Marmara University and Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University were selected using a systematic random sampling method (every third eligible patient). The structured questionnaire consisted of 15 items, including demographic questions and 14 knowledge-based items related to radiation dose, biological effects, and protection principles. Each correct answer was assigned 1 point, while incorrect or "not sure" answers were scored as 0, producing a total score from 0 to 13, later converted to a 0-100 scale. Data were analyzed using SPSS v29. Descriptive statistics, independent-samples t-tests, and one-way ANOVA were performed, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.
resultsAmong the participants, the highest proportion fell within the 18-25 age group (36.1%). The mean knowledge scores were 52.39 ± 17.58 for Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University and 53.50 ± 17.29 for Marmara University, with no statistically significant difference between the two faculties (p = 0.524). However, participants aged 18-25 years scored significantly higher than older age groups (p = 0.001). Social media was the most frequently reported source of information (47.3%).
conclusionsOur study concluded that patients did not possess sufficient knowledge regarding the hazards of radiation and protective methods against radiation. In order to increase participants' level of knowledge and awareness, educational sessions should be organised in healthcare facilities and educational institutions. These efforts should be supported and reinforced by distributing brochures and through media outlets.
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.