ArticleBMC medical education2026
Contemporary endodontic practices among endodontic specialists in Saudi Arabia: a comparative cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC medical education, 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.
- Article
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
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to assess and compare contemporary evidence-based endodontic practices and continuing education preferences among endodontists.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted between November 2023 and January 2024 through in-person recruitment of endodontic residents and practicing endodontists from governmental and private sectors, as well as at a national dental conference. The questionnaire included 4 demographic items and 21 items evaluating clinical practices, satisfaction, and preferences for continuing education. Questions were presented in multiple-choice and Likert-scale formats. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and associations were examined using chi-square, Fisher’s exact and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
resultsA total of 115 endodontists met the inclusion criteria (residents: 30.4%, n = 35; specialists/consultants: 69.6%, n = 80). Most participants had fewer than 10 years of experience and worked in governmental institutions (78.3%, n = 90), although over half practiced in multiple settings. Cold testing and periapical radiographs were used universally. Sodium hypochlorite irrigation, electronic apex locators, and rotary instrumentation were used by nearly all respondents. Obturation was most commonly performed using warm vertical compaction and/or single-cone techniques (83.5%, n = 96). Calcium silicate-based sealers (93.9%, n = 108) and system-matched gutta-percha (97.4%, n = 112) were widely preferred. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used by 80% (n = 92), and consultants were more likely to request it routinely (p = 0.002). Consistent use of magnification and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) solution was reported by 46.9% (n = 54) and 49.6% (n = 57), respectively. Satisfaction with instrumentation and obturation was moderate. Certification or fellowship programs were the preferred formats for continuing education.
conclusionsEndodontics residents, specialists and consultants reported strong adoption of several core evidence-based technologies. However, variation remains in routine CBCT use, magnification, and adjunctive EDTA irrigation. Structured continuing education programs were most preferred.
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.