↓ Skip to main content

Children and parents’ perspectives on the acceptability of three management strategies for dental caries in primary teeth within the ‘Filling Children’s Teeth: Indicated or Not’ (FiCTION) randomised…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Oral Health, March 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
Children and parents’ perspectives on the acceptability of three management strategies for dental caries in primary teeth within the ‘Filling Children’s Teeth: Indicated or Not’ (FiCTION) randomised controlled trial – a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Oral Health, March 2020
DOI 10.1186/s12903-020-1060-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarab El-Yousfi, Nicola P. T. Innes, Richard D. Holmes, Ruth Freeman, Kathryn B. Cunningham, Elaine McColl, Anne Maguire, Gail V. A. Douglas, Janet E. Clarkson, Zoe Marshman

Abstract

The Filling Children's Teeth: Indicated Or Not? (FiCTION) randomised controlled trial (RCT) aimed to explore the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of managing dental caries in children's primary teeth. The trial compared three management strategies: conventional caries management with best practice prevention (C + P), biological management with best practice prevention (B + P) and best practice prevention alone (PA)-based approaches. Recently, the concept of treatment acceptability has gained attention and attempts have been made to provide a conceptual definition, however this has mainly focused on adults. Recognising the importance of evaluating the acceptability of interventions in addition to their effectiveness, particularly for multi-component complex interventions, the trial design included a qualitative component. The aim of this component was to explore the acceptability of the three strategies from the perspectives of the child participants and their parents. Qualitative exploration, based on the concept of acceptability. Participants were children already taking part in the FiCTION trial and their parents. Children were identified through purposive maximum variation sampling. The sample included children from the three management strategy arms who had been treated and followed up; median (IQR) follow-up was at 33.8 (23.8, 36.7) months. Semi-structured interviews with thirteen child-parent dyads. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a framework approach. Data saturation was reached after thirteen interviews. Each child-parent dyad took part in one interview together. The participants were eight girls and five boys aged 5-11 years and their parents. The children's distribution across the trial arms was: C + P n = 4; B + P n = 5; PA n = 4. Three key factors influenced the acceptability of caries management in primary teeth to children and parents: i) experiences of specific procedures within management strategies; ii) experiences of anticipatory dental anxiety and; iii) perceptions of effectiveness (particularly whether pain was reduced). These factors were underpinned by a fourth key factor: the notion of trust in the dental professionals - this was pervasive across all arms. Overall children and parents found each of the three strategies for the management of dental caries in primary teeth acceptable, with trust in the dental professional playing an important role.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Master 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Researcher 5 5%
Other 4 4%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 38 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Psychology 6 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Chemical Engineering 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 38 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 August 2020.
All research outputs
#4,606,043
of 23,316,003 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#275
of 1,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,619
of 364,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#12
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,316,003 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,528 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.