Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41952023›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of dental hygiene2026

Investigation of Misleading Techniques Used in Online Fluoride Misinformation.

Matheus Lotto, Caio Sampaio, Olívia Santana Jorge, Juliano Pelim Pessan, Thiago Cruvinel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of dental hygiene, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Matheus LottoDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics, and Public Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0121-4006
Caio SampaioDepartment of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araçatuba, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6861-7205
Olívia Santana JorgeDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics, and Public Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5266-5798
Juliano Pelim PessanDepartment of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araçatuba, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1550-3933
Thiago CruvinelDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics, and Public Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7095-908X

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2019/27242-0;2023/11709-2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesFluoride misinformation can fuel anti-fluoridation movements, influencing political decisions and dental treatment choices. This study aimed to elucidate the misleading techniques used to produce online fluoride misinformation. METHODOLOGY: Two independent investigators searched scientific databases for references that supported or refuted 33 fluoride misinformation messages, derived from a prior study that manually identified dental falsehoods on websites through thematic content analysis. The levels of evidence were assessed according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (levels 1-5) and the GRADE guidelines (high to very low, indicating the degree of confidence that the direction of the net effect is correct). Misleading techniques were classified as false attribution, when no reference supported a message, or quote mining, when at least one supporting reference was identified but used out of context.

resultsNineteen references were identified to refute 27 fluoride misinformation, while seven references were identified to support six misinformation messages. False attribution was the predominant technique (81.82%), compared to quote mining (18.18%). The levels of evidence and strength of recommendations for refuting references ranged from 1A-1B (high, 31.6%) to 2C-5 (very low, 57.9%). Supporting references ranged from 2B (low, 14.3%) to 2C-5 (very low, 85.7%). The claim 'fluoride accumulates in the body' was the only one supported by low-level evidence.

conclusionsOnline fluoride misinformation is most often grounded in false attribution. Understanding the strategies that authors use to construct these false messages can support health educators in creating more targeted and effective prebunking and debunking interventions.

Indexed as

CommunicationFluoridesInternetDigital MediaFluoridationHumansFluorideseHealthfluorideinfodemiologymisinformationsocial media

Identifiers

PMID41952023
PMCPMC13622901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.