↓ Skip to main content

Outcomes in randomised controlled trials in prevention and management of carious lesions: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Outcomes in randomised controlled trials in prevention and management of carious lesions: a systematic review
Published in
Trials, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-2256-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Colin Levey, Nicola Innes, Falk Schwendicke, Thomas Lamont, Gerd Göstemeyer

Abstract

Inconsistent outcome reporting is one significant hurdle to combining results from trials into systematic reviews. Core outcome sets (COS) can reduce this barrier. The aim of this review was to map outcomes reported in caries prevention and management randomised controlled trials (RCT) as a first step to COS development. We also investigated RCT characteristics and reporting of primary outcomes and sample size calculations. PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge and Cochrane CENTRAL were systematically searched (1 January 1968 to 25 August 2015). RCTs comparing any technique for prevention or management of caries with another or placebo and RCTs comparing interventions to support patients undergoing treatment of caries (without setting, dentition or age restrictions). Categories were developed through piloting and group consensus and outcomes grouped accordingly. Of 4773 search results, 764 were potentially relevant, full text was available for 731 papers and 605 publications met the inclusion criteria and were included. For all outcomes across the time periods 1968-1980 and 2001-2010, reporting of outcome 'caries experience' reduced from 39% to 18%; 'clinical performance of the restoration' reporting increased from 33% to 42% although there was a reduction to 22% in 2011-2015. Emerging outcome domains include 'lesion activity' and 'pulp health-related outcomes', accounting for 1% and 0%, respectively, during 1968-1980 and 10% and 4% for 2011-2015. Reporting 'resource efficiency' and 'quality of life measures' have remained at a low level. No publications reported tooth survival independent of an index such as DMFT or equivalent. Primary outcomes were only identified as such in 414 (68%) of the reports. Over the past 50 years, outcome reporting for trials on prevention and management of carious lesions have tended to focus on outcomes measuring caries experience and restoration material clinical performance with lesion activity and cost-effectiveness increasingly being reported. Patient-reported and patient-focused outcomes are becoming more common (although as secondary outcomes) but remain low in use. The challenge with developing a COS will be balancing commonly previously reported outcomes against those more relevant for the future. PROSPERO, CRD42015025310 . Registered on 14 August 2015, Trials (Schwendicke et al., Trials 16:397, 2015) and COMET initiative online (COMET, 2017).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Researcher 8 8%
Professor 7 7%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 27 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 31 32%