ArticleFrontiers in health services2026
Oral health reception and risk classification protocol: development and validation in a dental emergency service.
Article in Frontiers in health services, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to develop and validate an Oral Health Reception and Risk Classification Protocol for dental emergencies to optimize care and organize service demands. This methodological study was conducted in four stages: literature review to identify existing models, protocol development, content validation by expert judges, and a pilot study to analyze reliability. The protocol, based on the Manchester Triage System and the Oral Health Network Guidelines of Paraná, was structured in nine items: personal data, history of the current condition, pain, pain classification, vital signs, need for medication, medical history, priority, and risk classification. The pilot study included 80 patients treated at the Dental Emergency Service of the School of Dentistry, Federal University of Uberlândia (PSO-HOUFU). A total of 93.75% of patients reported pain, predominantly spontaneous and intense. The most frequent classifications were yellow risk (50%) and green risk (45%). The average time between arrival and treatment was 1 h 33 min, with a dropout rate of 2.5%. Ten on-call professionals participated in the validation using the Content Validity Index. The Kappa coefficient indicated a 97% agreement. The protocol was considered valid in terms of appearance, clarity, and relevance. It can be safely used by health professionals in dental emergency triage.
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.