FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1517301504> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1517301504 abstract "Poor or inequitable access to oral health care is commonly reported in high-, middle- and low-income countries. Although the severity of these problems varies, a lack of supply of dentists and their uneven distribution are important factors. Delegating care to dental auxiliaries could ease this problem, extend services to where they are unavailable and liberate time for dentists to do more complex work. Before such an approach can be advocated, it is important to know the relative effectiveness of dental auxiliaries and dentists.To assess the effectiveness, costs and cost effectiveness of dental auxiliaries in providing care traditionally provided by dentists.We searched the following electronic databases from their inception dates up to November 2013: the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group's Specialised Register; Cochrane Oral Health Group's Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 11, 2013); MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness; five other databases and two trial registries. We also undertook a grey literature search and searched the reference list of included studies and contacted authors of relevant papers.We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled clinical trials (NRCTs), interrupted time series (ITSs) and controlled before and after studies (CBAs) evaluating the effectiveness of dental auxiliaries compared with dentists in undertaking clinical tasks traditionally performed by a dentist.Three review authors independently applied eligibility criteria, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of each included study and two review authors assessed the quality of the evidence from the included studies, according to The Cochrane Collaboration's procedures. Since meta-analysis was not possible, we gave a narrative description of the results.We identified five studies (one cluster RCT, three RCTs and one NRCT), evaluating the effectiveness of dental auxiliaries compared with dentists in providing dental care traditionally provided by dentists, eligible for inclusion in this review. The included studies, which involved 13 dental auxiliaries, six dentists, and more than 1156 participants, evaluated two clinical tasks/techniques: placement of preventive resin fissure sealants and the atraumatic restorative technique (ART). Two studies were conducted in the US, and one each in Canada, Gambia and Singapore.Of the four studies evaluating effectiveness in placing preventive resin fissure sealants, three found no evidence of a difference in retention rates of those placed by dental auxiliaries and dentists over a range of follow-up periods (six to 24 months). One study found that fissure sealants placed by a dental auxiliary had lower retention rates than one placed by a dentist after 48 months (9.0% with auxiliary versus 29.1% with dentist). The same study reported that the net reduction after 48 months in the number teeth exhibiting caries (dental decay) was lower for teeth treated by the dental auxiliary than the dentist (3 with auxiliary versus 60 with dentist, P value < 0.001).One study showed no evidence of a difference in dental decay after treatment with fissure sealants between groups. The one study comparing the effectiveness of dental auxiliaries and dentists in performing ART reported no difference in survival rates of the restorations (fillings) after 12 months.All studies were at high risk of bias and the overall quality of the evidence was very low, as assessed using the GRADE approach. In addition, four of the included studies were more than 20 years old; the materials used and the techniques assessed were out of date. We found no eligible studies comparing the effectiveness of dental auxiliaries and dentists in the diagnosis of oral diseases and conditions, in delivering oral health education and other aspects of health promotion, or studies assessing participants' perspectives including the acceptability of care received. None of the included studies reported adverse effects. In addition, we found no studies comparing the costs and cost-effectiveness of dental auxiliaries and dentists, their impact on access and equity of access to care that met the pre-specified inclusion criteria.We only identified five studies for inclusion in this review, all of which were at high risk of bias and four were published more than 20 years ago, highlighting the paucity of high-quality evaluations of the relative effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of dental auxiliaries compared with dentists in performing clinical tasks. No firm conclusions could be drawn from the present review about the relative effectiveness of dental auxiliaries and dentists." @default.
• W1517301504 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1517301504 creator A5026032835 @default.
• W1517301504 creator A5050551405 @default.
• W1517301504 creator A5061338386 @default.
• W1517301504 creator A5070728871 @default.
• W1517301504 creator A5074731029 @default.
• W1517301504 creator A5081608180 @default.
• W1517301504 creator A5082679187 @default.
• W1517301504 date "2014-08-20" @default.
• W1517301504 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W1517301504 title "Dental auxiliaries for dental care traditionally provided by dentists" @default.
• W1517301504 cites W1968492426 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W1972577098 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W1974541627 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W1974845264 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W1974911071 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W1985005905 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W1987242396 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2003315815 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2025948819 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2029989619 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2035064323 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2046716717 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2054173187 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2054264627 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2064668144 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2074639403 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2089558965 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2105501846 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2124398029 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2149307306 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W2157966697 @default.
• W1517301504 cites W4294215472 @default.
• W1517301504 doi "https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd010076.pub2" @default.
• W1517301504 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25140869" @default.
• W1517301504 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W1517301504 type Work @default.
• W1517301504 sameAs 1517301504 @default.
• W1517301504 citedByCount "16" @default.
• W1517301504 countsByYear W15173015042015 @default.
• W1517301504 countsByYear W15173015042016 @default.
• W1517301504 countsByYear W15173015042017 @default.
• W1517301504 countsByYear W15173015042018 @default.
• W1517301504 countsByYear W15173015042020 @default.
• W1517301504 countsByYear W15173015042021 @default.
• W1517301504 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1517301504 hasAuthorship W1517301504A5026032835 @default.
• W1517301504 hasAuthorship W1517301504A5050551405 @default.
• W1517301504 hasAuthorship W1517301504A5061338386 @default.
• W1517301504 hasAuthorship W1517301504A5070728871 @default.
• W1517301504 hasAuthorship W1517301504A5074731029 @default.
• W1517301504 hasAuthorship W1517301504A5081608180 @default.
• W1517301504 hasAuthorship W1517301504A5082679187 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C159110408 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C160735492 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C189708586 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C27415008 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C2779473830 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C2781145037 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C50522688 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C535046627 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C61904560 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C141071460 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C142724271 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C159110408 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C160735492 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C162324750 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C168563851 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C17744445 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C189708586 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C199539241 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C27415008 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C2779473830 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C2781145037 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C50522688 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C512399662 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C535046627 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C61904560 @default.
• W1517301504 hasConceptScore W1517301504C71924100 @default.
• W1517301504 hasLocation W15173015041 @default.
• W1517301504 hasLocation W15173015042 @default.
• W1517301504 hasOpenAccess W1517301504 @default.
• W1517301504 hasPrimaryLocation W15173015041 @default.
• W1517301504 hasRelatedWork W2097315214 @default.
• W1517301504 hasRelatedWork W2778809656 @default.
• W1517301504 hasRelatedWork W2913695460 @default.
• W1517301504 hasRelatedWork W2940694401 @default.
• W1517301504 hasRelatedWork W3016732097 @default.
• W1517301504 hasRelatedWork W3141519074 @default.
• W1517301504 hasRelatedWork W3176106399 @default.
• W1517301504 hasRelatedWork W3185715563 @default.

• next