ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2026
Screening for paediatric sleep disordered breathing in the dental setting: a scoping review.
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2026. 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.
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
backgroundSleep-disordered breathing (SDB) is under-recognised and under-diagnosed in children. Therefore, SDB screening during routine dental appointments may be considered a scalable approach to identifying at-risk children and guiding referrals to sleep specialists. This scoping review aims to explore the literature on paediatric SDB screening in dental settings and identify knowledge gaps.
methodsA scoping review was conducted using Medline, Embase, and PubMed. The inclusion criteria were: studies conducted in dental settings that describe SDB screening in non-syndromic patients aged 18 or younger, without previous surgical management for OSA.
resultsThirty-four studies were included, most of which were observational descriptive studies (n = 32). Eleven screening tools were used across studies: the most common being the Paediatric Sleep Questionnaire (n = 23). Numerous studies (n = 16) have reported the prevalence of positive SDB screening outcomes among the paediatric population, while others explored associations with sociodemographic factors (n = 7), craniofacial features (n = 11), medical conditions (n = 9), orthodontic treatment (n = 6), and oral health outcomes (n = 4). Two studies developed novel screening measures. A small number of studies discussed referral pathways (n = 7), and only one study documented referral outcomes.
conclusionsThis review highlights the need for further validation of paediatric sleep questionnaires within dental settings. However, additional validation of clinical assessment tools in this context may offer limited incremental benefit. Furthermore, none of the included studies examined how screening protocols integrate within routine dental workflows or explored perceptions of children, caregivers, and dental practitioners. Lastly, there is a paucity of evidence concerning referral pathways and follow-up outcomes subsequent to screening.
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.