ArticleCureus2026
Assessment of Knowledge and Clinical Practice Patterns in Restorative Material Selection for Anterior Teeth Among Dental Practitioners.
Article in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe selection of restorative materials for anterior teeth is a critical aspect of contemporary restorative dentistry that requires the integration of esthetic, functional, and biological considerations. The increasing availability of restorative materials and adhesive technologies necessitates evidence-based decision-making to optimize treatment outcomes. However, variations in practitioner knowledge and clinical practice may influence restorative material selection and treatment success. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the knowledge and clinical practice patterns of dental practitioners regarding restorative material selection for anterior teeth and to identify factors associated with evidence-based restorative decision-making. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey was conducted with 160 registered dental practitioners, including non-specialist and specialist dental practitioners. A structured, self-administered questionnaire consisting of demographic details, 10 knowledge-based questions, and 10 practice-based questions was developed following a literature review and expert validation. A pilot study was conducted with 30 practitioners to assess the clarity and reliability. Knowledge and practice scores were calculated using predefined criteria. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics including independent t-tests, chi-squared tests, Pearson's correlation analysis, and binary logistic regression. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
resultsAmong the 160 participants, specialists demonstrated significantly higher knowledge scores (7.88±2.01) and practice scores (7.59±2.06) than non-specialists (5.92±2.03 and 5.41±2.12, respectively; p<0.001). Good knowledge was observed in 56 (35%) participants, while good clinical practice was observed in 41 (25.6%). Knowledge scores showed a strong positive correlation with practice scores (r=0.73; p=0.002). Years of clinical experience was positively associated with both knowledge and practice. Logistic regression analysis identified specialist qualifications, greater clinical experience, and higher knowledge scores as significant predictors of good clinical practice (p<0.05).
conclusionSpecialist dental practitioners demonstrated superior knowledge, clinical practice patterns, and overall competency in restorative material selection for anterior teeth compared with non-specialists. Knowledge, professional qualifications, and clinical experience are significant determinants of evidence-based restorative decision-making. Continuous professional education and training programs may enhance restorative treatment planning and improve clinical outcomes.
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.