Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42403267›Full record

ArticleJournal of periodontal research2026

The Journey of Oral Hygiene: The Past, the Present, the Future.

Fridus van der Weijden

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of periodontal research, 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

1 author.

Fridus van der WeijdenAcademic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), A Joint Venture Between the Faculty of Dentistry of the University of Amsterdam and the Faculty of Dentistry of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5075-8384

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This narrative review traces the evolution of personal oral hygiene from antiquity to the present, examining the shift from rudimentary tools to evidence-based, technologically advanced systems. Historical developments were reviewed alongside current clinical research, including systematic reviews and professional guidelines (e.g., EFP S3-level), to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and behavioral aspects of oral hygiene practices. Oral hygiene has progressed from ancient chewing sticks to modern powered toothbrushes and interdental devices. While manual toothbrushes remain effective, oscillating-rotating and sonic technologies offer more plaque reduction and better gingival outcomes. Interdental cleaning has increasingly favored interdental brushes over dental floss, though rubber picks and oral irrigators provide effective and patient-preferred alternatives. Dentifrices have evolved from simple abrasives to vehicles for fluoride, antimicrobial, and other therapeutic agents. Despite these innovations, oral disease persists, largely due to discrepancies between perceived and actual brushing behaviors, including inadequate duration and technique. Optimal gingival health continues to depend on the quality and consistency of self-performed mechanical plaque removal. Emerging technologies and sustainable, eco-friendly materials may enhance compliance and accessibility, yet they cannot replace professional instruction or habit formation. Future strategies should prioritize personalized, evidence-based oral care that balances clinical efficacy, environmental sustainability, and equitable access.

Indexed as

Oral HygieneDental PlaqueDentifricesHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumansToothbrushingDentifricesflossinterdental brushmouthrinseoral hygieneoral irrigatortoothbrushtoothpastetoothpick

Identifiers

PMID42403267
PMCPMC13378319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.