ArticleBMC oral health2025
Endodontic consultation and referral practices among Finnish general dental practitioners - a questionnaire-based cross-sectional 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo study the consultation and referral practices of Finnish dentists treating endodontic patients and to investigate the associations between dentists' backgrounds and their practices.
methodsThis cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted during endodontic training sessions held in seven cities in Finland. After the lecture, a structured Webropol questionnaire was used to collect the background information and endodontic consultation and referral practices of the attending dentists (n = 96). These practices included reasons for consultations and referrals, choice of consulted professional, and number of endodontic consultations and referrals. The associations of explanatory variables (gender, years of practice, participation in endodontic education, case difficulty, occurred complication) with the choice of consulted professional (endodontist/experienced colleague) and with the number of endodontic referrals done (0/1-5times/>5times) were analyzed with binary or ordinal logistic regression, respectively.
resultsA total of 96 dentists responded to the questionnaire. Most respondents were female (74%), under 45 years of age (77%), general dental practitioners (93%), and were working in the public sector (94%) with less than 10 years of working experience (66%). The majority (73%) of the dentists worked in two out of seven counties. In the context of endodontic cases, 34% of the dentists had never referred a patient. An experienced colleague was consulted rather than an endodontist by 59% of the dentists. However, 55% of the respondents had consulted an endodontist at least once. In the logistic regression, years of practice more than 10 years [6.06 (1.83-20.06), p = 0.003] and participation in endodontic education [4.19 (1.29-13.59), p = 0.02] associated with the likelihood of consulting an endodontist instead of an experienced colleague. In the ordinal regression, years of practice more than 10 years [3.66 (1.32-10.18), p = 0.01] associated with the likelihood of numerous referrals.
conclusionsThere remains a continued need for consultations and referrals to endodontists among Finnish dentists. Our findings indicate that clinical experience and postgraduate education increase the likelihood of consulting or referring to an endodontist, rather than relying solely on advice from experienced colleague.
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.