ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2026
Evidence-Based Practice in Dentistry and OMFS: KAP Study.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Evidence-based practice (EBP) in dentistry and oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) is essential for improving patient outcomes. Despite global emphasis, its implementation in clinical settings remains inconsistent in India. Aim: To assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) regarding EBP among dental and OMFS professionals across various Indian states. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 2,634 dental professionals using a structured, pre-validated questionnaire. The survey included questions on EBP awareness, use of research tools, clinical application, and patient communication. Descriptive statistics were used, and associations were analyzed using Chi-square and ANOVA, with Results: Of the respondents, 87.93% were aware of EBP, and 66.32% knew how to access research databases. While 84.25% believed EBP should be a core clinical component, only 57.06% regularly consulted research before treatment, and 55.73% discussed evidence-based options with patients. OMFS postgraduates had significantly higher knowledge and practice scores ( Conclusion: Despite favorable attitudes, the practical use of EBP remains limited. Institutional support, improved access to resources, and formal training are necessary to bridge the knowledge-practice gap.
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.