Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42847487›Full record

Observational studySpecial care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric Dentistry

Reliability and Diagnostic Performance of Digital Versus Clinical Assessment of Oral Hygiene and Gingival Health in Older Community-dwelling Adults.

Isabel Deeg, Christoph Matthias Schoppmeier, Karolin Höfer, Alicia Maria Meyer-Hofmann, Dirk Bleiel, Anna Greta Barbe

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric Dentistry. 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

6 authors.

Isabel DeegFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Polyclinic For Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0306-5873
Christoph Matthias SchoppmeierFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Polyclinic For Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3269-8920
Karolin HöferFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Polyclinic For Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8284-9849
Alicia Maria Meyer-HofmannFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Polyclinic For Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3296-7553
Dirk BleielJoint dental practice, Dres. Pia und Dirk Bleiel, Rheinbreitbach, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-5294-8853
Anna Greta BarbeFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Polyclinic For Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0169-2582

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThis study evaluated the diagnostic performance and interexaminer reliability of digital versus clinical oral hygiene assessments in community-dwelling older adults, focusing on the Plaque Index for Long-Term Care (PI-LTC), Quigley-Hein Index (QHI), and Marginal Gingival Index (MGI). METHODS AND

resultsFifty-two participants aged ≥ 65 years (mean 77.2 ± 6.8 years) underwent standardized clinical and digital examinations before (PI-LTC, QHI, MGI) and after professional toothbrushing (QHI). Two independent digital examiners-one calibrated for gerodontology (D

conclusionDigital intraoral scanning enables reliable and valid assessment of oral hygiene in older adults. Examiner calibration substantially enhances diagnostic precision, though uncalibrated digital evaluations also remain clinically useful. The QHI offers superior reproducibility, whereas the PI-LTC provides greater sensitivity for plaque risk detection. CLINICAL

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), DRKS00032639, 19.07.2024.

Indexed as

Oral HygieneAgedAged, 80 and overDental Plaque IndexFemaleHumansIndependent LivingMalePeriodontal IndexReproducibility of Resultsageddental plaquegingivitisintraoral scannersoral hygienetelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID42847487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.