China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Epidemiology in Dentistry
Published in Meera Patel, Nakul Patel, Kevin Lewis, Raman Bedi, Gaman Patel, Nakul Patel, Dental Public Health, 2018
Meera Patel, Nakul Patel, Kevin Lewis, Raman Bedi, Gaman Patel, Nakul Patel
Evidence-based dentistry is a relatively recent approach that will allow you to critically read and assess the quality of such papers and reports, and to understand how to translate the results into your practice. Once qualified, you will be responsible for keeping abreast of new developments in the aetiology, detection, prevention and treatment of dental disorders, including techniques and new materials. This is most effectively achieved through research papers published in scientific journals, in particular systematic reviews, and reports from professional bodies.
Caries treatment in a four-year-old boy using hypnosis – a case report
Published in American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 2021
Thomas Gerhard Wolf, Katharina Nadja Kellerhoff, Albrecht Schmierer, Gudrun Schmierer, Ulrike Halsband
The American Dental Association (ADA) has defined evidence-based dentistry as “an approach to oral healthcare that requires the judicious integration of systematic assessments of clinically relevant scientific evidence, relating to the patient’s oral and medical condition and history, with the dentist’s clinical expertise and the patient’s treatment needs and preferences” (Ismail & Bader, 2004). Currently, guideline projects are being carried out that evaluate hypnosis negatively due the lack of randomized and well-controlled studies (AKPP, 2019). Therefore, it is essential that more valid and reliable studies with high quality are conceived and planned. Thus, showing that dental hypnosis is an effective and safe method with benefits for both the dental team and the patients.
Top 100 cited systematic reviews and meta-analyses in dentistry
Published in Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, 2020
Christos Gogos, Konstantinos Kodonas, Anastasia Fardi, Nikolaos Economides
The practice of evidence-based medicine utilizes the best available evidence in order to make accurate and knowledgeable treatment decisions. Basic requirements for making the right clinical decisions are integration of clinical knowledge, clinical expertise and judgement, patient values with the best available research evidence [26]. Evidence-Based Dentistry has been defined as an approach to oral health care that requires the judicious integration of systematic assessments of clinically relevant scientific evidence, relating to patient’s oral & medical condition & history, with the dentists clinical expertise & the patient’s treatment needs & preferences [27]. Thus, dental scientists should be able to identify, critique and categorize literature, and place it into a so-called hierarchy of evidence, with systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCT’s at the top contributing to the highest level of evidence, followed by randomized clinical trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-over studies, cross-sectional studies, case studies, and expert opinions and uncontrolled studies or opinion at the bottom [28]. Systematic reviews summarize the large body of literature on a particular topic with the intention to analyze the data in published articles in an effort to provide scientific evidence to the clinician for the practice of healthcare. Meta-analysis may be defined as a statistical synthesis of data obtained from original research articles previously gathered by means of a systematic review in which data are comparable [29]. A systematic review may or may not include a meta-analysis, which is a quantitative summary of the results. Among the research method advantages they include, a format of clear research questions, risk of bias assessment, comprehensive literature search, and critical analysis of the results that provide extensive information on a specific issue. Nevertheless, study designs have also limitations. These include the incorporation of invalid conclusions of studies with low scientific evidence, methodological errors in meta-analysis and the lack of heterogeneity assessment. Perhaps one of the most important issues to be addressed when evaluating a systematic review refers to the clarity of the primary research question and the ability of adhesion to an ideal study protocol on a specific scientific field [30].