ArticlePloS one2026
A qualitative analysis of Chinese novice general dentists' perspectives on using ergonomic loupes in clinical practice.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundErgonomic loupes are the next-generation loupes with built-in refractive prisms that enable the user to sit up straight, look straight ahead, and reduce neck tilt while viewing the operating field from down below. They differ greatly from traditional loupes in optic design and viewer perspective. They appeared on the market in 2022 and are quickly gaining popularity in China. In this study, we sought to use semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis to assess the perspectives of novice Chinese general dentists on using ergonomic loupes in clinical practice.
methodsThe study population consisted of nineteen general dentistry residents undergoing training at Peking University Third Hospital in Beijing, China. Semi-structured interviews were conducted individually with participants. The interview data were analyzed thematically using NVivo 11 software.
resultsThe findings revealed that the benefits of using ergonomic loupes included enhanced visual acuity, more precision, improved posture, and improved treatment quality. Main disadvantages included discomfort from use, splash protection issue, fixed viewpoint, and limited field of view. There was typically a brief adaptation process for the new user. Participants were weighing cost and benefit in deciding whether and where to use ergonomic loupes. Comparative experience showed that ergonomic loupes had ergonomic advantages, while traditional loupes had hand-eye coordination advantages.
conclusionThe participants had overall positive perspectives on using ergonomic loupes in clinical practice. Comparative experience showed that ergonomic loupes had ergonomic advantages, while traditional loupes had hand-eye coordination advantages.
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.