ArticleCureus2026
Dental Students' Knowledge and Opinion on Optimizing Antibiotic Prophylaxis Guidelines: A Cross-Sectional Survey in India.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAntibiotic prophylaxis (AP) prescription is recommended to aid the body's defense in clearing tissues of microbial pathogens in patients at high risk of adverse outcomes, bacteremia, or infection undergoing invasive oral and dental procedures. A variety of influences impact dentists' decisions regarding AP prescribing. There is a paucity of data on diverse prescribing patterns of antibiotics as prophylaxis among dental students and professionals. Despite accumulating antimicrobial resistance (AMR), knowledge gaps regarding optimal prophylaxis practices persist among dental students and professionals. Considering India's massive dental workforce, it is necessary to evaluate dentists' current AP guideline knowledge and align local prophylaxis practices with international standards.
objectivesThis study aimed to assess the comprehension of current AP guidelines and AMR among dental students at multiple universities in India. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among fourth-year students, interns, and postgraduate dental students across 18 universities in India. The study was conducted using a Google Form-based questionnaire regarding AP guidelines and AMR. The Google Form was distributed, and responses were collected. Descriptive statistics were employed, and data were presented as frequencies and percentages. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 23.0.
resultsOut of 250 dental students, 63.6% (n = 159) were female, and 36.3% (n = 91) were male. The majority were interns at 38.8% (n = 97), followed by fourth-year students at 37.6% (n = 94) and postgraduates at 23.6% (n = 59). At first glance, approximately three out of four practitioners believed that they were practicing evidence-based dentistry. However, when this self-reported familiarity was cross-referenced, only 35.1% (n = 88) actually used American Dental Association (ADA) guidelines as their primary decision-making tool, and only 26.3% (n = 66) knew the correct amoxicillin dosage one hour prior to the procedure. About 84.1% (n = 210) believed that there are almost no educational resources regarding AMR for Indian dental practitioners, whereas 89.2% (n = 223) thought that there is an urgent need to develop relevant guidelines considering AMR.
conclusionsThis study highlighted a significant knowledge-practice gap due to the absence of relevant AP guidelines considering AMR for Indian dental practitioners. The majority of dental students perceived this as one of the important catalysts for the rising rates of AMR.
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.