Trial reportClinical oral investigations2026
Subject-specific stability of toothbrushing performance: insights from dynamic time warping and phenotype analysis.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study investigated whether habitual toothbrushing performance is stable within individuals across repeated observations, whether brushing performance changes after different experimental conditions and whether chewing frequency is associated with rhythmic brushing variables. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this randomized crossover study, 65 healthy young adults (24.6 ± 2.7 years) completed two study visits. At each visit, habitual manual toothbrushing was video-recorded before and after the assigned experimental condition, which consisted of brushing either after gum chewing or landscape-video viewing. Brushing performance was analysed with regard to active brushing time, surface-specific time allocation, switching behaviour, and brushing stroke rate. Sequence similarity was quantified using dynamic time warping (DTW), and brushing phenotypes were identified by k-means clustering of baseline spatiotemporal features.
resultsTime spent on oral, vestibular, and occlusal surfaces did not differ significantly after chewing (all p ≥ 0.300) or landscape-video viewing (all p ≥ 0.340). Baseline within-subject DTW distances were markedly lower than between-subject distances (0.38 ± 0.16 vs. 0.69 ± 0.12), corresponding to a 93.4% probability that a randomly selected within-subject distance was smaller than a randomly selected between-subject distance. Three brushing phenotypes (clusters) were identified: (I) long-dwell/systematic (n = 13); (II) local-switching (n = 23); and (III) global-hopping (n = 29). All core spatiotemporal features differed significantly across clusters (all p < 0.001). Brushing stroke rate showed very high cross-session consistency (Spearman's ρ = 0.90-0.95) and a weak positive association with chewing frequency (ρ = 0.28-0.34), whereas switching rate showed no such association.
conclusionsCore features of toothbrushing performance appear highly stable within individuals and are not meaningfully altered by brief contextual manipulations. Toothbrushing performance therefore reflects habitual execution, but in distinct subject-specific phenotypes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Stable but heterogeneous brushing routines may help explain why oral hygiene often remains suboptimal despite toothbrushing instructions and hands-on-trainings.
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.