Dental service use among adults with incident type 2 diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis or inflammatory bowel disease.

OBJECTIVES: It is not clear if or how the incidence of systemic conditions like type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2), rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) affects dental service utilization. Using nationwide Danish register data, the aim of this study was to analyse the use of dental services 7 years before and after being diagnosed with DM2, RA or IBD between 1997 and 2011. METHODS: Information about incident DM2 was obtained from the National Diabetes Register, and incident RA and IBD were defined based on diagnosis codes of hospital contacts identified through the National Patient Register. Separately, for each of the three conditions, each individual with the incident condition was matched to one control individual based on age, gender, country of origin, municipality of residence, highest completed education, the main source of income and income using coarsened exact matching in the year of incidence. The use of dental services and treatments received within each calendar year from 7 years before to 7 years after getting the condition were analysed with generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: People with incident DM2 were less likely (by seven percentage points) to be dental service users within a year than people without incident DM2 for a period extending from up to 7 years prior to 7 years after the diagnosis. This difference even slightly increased after the diagnosis. Those with incident IBD exhibited a consistently but modestly higher proportion of dental service use (three percentage points) than those without incident IBD before and after the diagnosis. Differences in the use of services between those with or without incident RA were minor. For all three systemic diseases, detected differences mainly mirrored differences in the provision of supragingival scaling and restorative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the impact of these three systemic conditions on dental service use was minor.

Contesting the conventional wisdom of periodontal risk assessment.

Over the years, several reviews of periodontal risk assessment tools have been published. However, major misunderstandings still prevail in repeated attempts to use these tools for prognostic risk prediction. Here we review the principles of risk prediction and discuss the value and the challenges of using prediction models in periodontology. Most periodontal risk prediction models have not been properly developed according to guidance given for the risk prediction model development. This shortcoming has led to several problems, including the creation of arbitrary risk scores. These scores are often labelled as 'high risk' without explicit boundaries or thresholds for the underlying continuous risk estimates of patient-important outcomes. Moreover, it is apparent that prediction models are often misinterpreted as causal models by clinicians and researchers although they cannot be used as such. Additional challenges like the critical assessment of transportability and applicability of these prediction models, as well as their impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes, are not considered in the literature. Nevertheless, these instruments are promoted with claims regarding their ability to deliver more individualized and precise periodontitis treatment and prevention, purportedly resulting in improved patient outcomes. However, people with or without periodontitis deserve proper information about their risk of developing patient-important outcomes such as tooth loss or pain. The primary objective of disseminating such information should not be to emphasize assumed treatment efficacy, hype individualization of care, or promote business interests. Instead, the focus should be on providing individuals with locally validated and regularly updated predictions of specific risks based on readily accessible and valid key predictors (e.g. age and smoking).

Advancing Universal Oral Health Coverage via Person-Centred Outcomes.

The World Health Organization member states proposed a comprehensive "Global Strategy on Oral Health," which includes achieving universal oral health coverage by 2030. Challenges and barriers, including persistent inequalities, will hamper the achievement of universal oral health coverage. In low- and middle-income countries, the oral health of a large proportion of the population has been neglected, increasing oral health inequalities. In high-income countries, some receive excessive dental treatment, whilst particularly those with higher needs receive too little dental care. Therefore, an analysis of individual countries' needs, encompassing the training of oral health professionals in a new philosophy of care and attention and the optimisation of the existing resources, is necessary. Distancing from a person-centred focus has prompted individual and societal issues, including under-/overdiagnosis and under-/overtreatment. The person-centred approach considers the perceptions, needs, preferences, and circumstances of individuals and populations. Patient-reported outcome measures, such as self-rated and -reported health, reflect an individual's overall perception of health and are designed to mediate human biology (ie, the disease) and psychology. The usage of patient-reported outcome measures in dentistry to place the individual at the centre of treatment is delayed compared to other areas. This paper discusses some challenges and potential solutions of patient-reported outcome measures in dentistry for achieving universal oral health coverage.

Reporting of costs and economic impacts in randomized trials of de-implementation interventions for low-value care: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: De-implementation of low-value care can increase health care sustainability. We evaluated the reporting of direct costs of de-implementation and subsequent change (increase or decrease) in health care costs in randomized trials of de-implementation research. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and Scopus databases without any language restrictions up to May 2021. We conducted study screening and data extraction independently and in duplicate. We extracted information related to study characteristics, types and characteristics of interventions, de-implementation costs, and impacts on health care costs. We assessed risk of bias using a modified Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. RESULTS: We screened 10,733 articles, with 227 studies meeting the inclusion criteria, of which 50 included information on direct cost of de-implementation or impact of de-implementation on health care costs. Studies were mostly conducted in North America (36%) or Europe (32%) and in the primary care context (70%). The most common practice of interest was reduction in the use of antibiotics or other medications (74%). Most studies used education strategies (meetings, materials) (64%). Studies used either a single strategy (52%) or were multifaceted (48%). Of the 227 eligible studies, 18 (8%) reported on direct costs of the used de-implementation strategy; of which, 13 reported total costs, and 12 reported per unit costs (7 reported both). The costs of de-implementation strategies varied considerably. Of the 227 eligible studies, 43 (19%) reported on impact of de-implementation on health care costs. Health care costs decreased in 27 studies (63%), increased in 2 (5%), and were unchanged in 14 (33%). CONCLUSION: De-implementation randomized controlled trials typically did not report direct costs of the de-implementation strategies (92%) or the impacts of de-implementation on health care costs (81%). Lack of cost information may limit the value of de-implementation trials to decision-makers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: OSF (Open Science Framework): https://osf.io/ueq32 .

Transparency of COVID-19-related research: A meta-research study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the adherence to five transparency practices (data availability, code availability, protocol registration and conflicts of interest (COI), and funding disclosures) from open access Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related articles. METHODS: We searched and exported all open access COVID-19-related articles from PubMed-indexed journals in the Europe PubMed Central database published from January 2020 to June 9, 2022. With a validated and automated tool, we detected transparent practices of three paper types: research articles, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and reviews. Basic journal- and article-related information were retrieved from the database. We used R for the descriptive analyses. RESULTS: The total number of articles was 258,678, of which we were able to retrieve full texts of 186,157 (72%) articles from the database Over half of the papers (55.7%, n = 103,732) were research articles, 10.9% (n = 20,229) were review articles, and less than one percent (n = 1,202) were RCTs. Approximately nine-tenths of articles (in all three paper types) had a statement to disclose COI. Funding disclosure (83.9%, confidence interval (CI): 81.7-85.8 95%) and protocol registration (53.5%, 95% CI: 50.7-56.3) were more frequent in RCTs than in reviews or research articles. Reviews shared data (2.5%, 95% CI: 2.3-2.8) and code (0.4%, 95% CI: 0.4-0.5) less frequently than RCTs or research articles. Articles published in 2022 had the highest adherence to all five transparency practices. Most of the reviews (62%) and research articles (58%) adhered to two transparency practices, whereas almost half of the RCTs (47%) adhered to three practices. There were journal- and publisher-related differences in all five practices, and articles that did not adhere to transparency practices were more likely published in lowest impact journals and were less likely cited. CONCLUSION: While most articles were freely available and had a COI disclosure, adherence to other transparent practices was far from acceptable. A much stronger commitment to open science practices, particularly to protocol registration, data and code sharing, is needed from all stakeholders.

Justification for the 2017 periodontitis classification in the light of the Checklist for Modifying Disease Definitions: A narrative review.

Once a while, disease classifications have needed revision because new knowledge has accumulated, and new technologies and better treatments have emerged. Changes made to disease classifications should be trustworthy and openly justified. The periodontitis definition and classification system was changed in 2017 by the 'World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions'. The workshop, comprising clinicians and researchers, resulted in the production of a 23-article special issue that introduced the new definitions and classifications of periodontitis. In this narrative review, we critically review how the changes made to the periodontitis definition and classification were justified in the light of the Checklist for Modifying Disease Definitions. Under each of the eight items of the checklist, we have discussed how the item was or could have been considered in the light of the checklist and its guidance. In our view, the new definition and classification of periodontitis was presented in an understandable way, even though the changes from the previous definition were not made visible. However, the issues of (1) estimated changes in prevalence or incidence, (2) triggers for the change, (3) prognostic ability, (4) repeatability or reproducibility, (5) incremental benefits, (6) incremental harms or (7) net benefits and harms related to the introduction of new classification were not considered in the way suggested in the checklist. Thereby, a balanced assessment of potential benefits and harms associated with the new periodontitis classification system was not presented, and to a large extent it remains unknown if the use of the new classification system will provide more net benefits to patients and to the community than previous systems. It is our view that patients and societies deserve transparent and balanced assessments of the potential benefits and harms associated with the periodontitis classification. Importantly, these should reflect the values and preferences also of the patients and the wider community and consider the impact on resource usage.

Association of service use with subjective oral health indicators in a freedom of choice pilot.

OBJECTIVES: A freedom of choice pilot provided access to private oral health care services without queuing and with fixed public service-fees for participants in Tampere region, Finland in 2018-2019. The aim of this study was to investigate how use of oral health care services differed by demographics, socioeconomic status, dental fear, and self-reported oral health in this pilot. MATERIAL AND METHODS: SMS-messages including a link to online questionnaire were sent to participants who had booked an appointment, and to those who had not booked an appointment despite registering to pilot. We categorized participants to (1) those who had booked their first appointment before receiving SMS (visitors), (2) those who booked an appointment after receiving the SMS-message (late-visitors), and (3) those who had not booked an appointment during pilot (nonvisitors). We used regression analysis to estimate the association of age, gender, dental fear, economic situation, Oral Health Impact Profile-14-severity (oral health-related quality of life [OHRQoL]), self-reported oral health and need for oral health care (exposures) with oral health care service use during the pilot (outcome). RESULTS: Out of 2300 participants, 636 (28%) responded. Late-visitors were more likely older and reported more likely need for oral health care, poorer oral health and OHRQoL than visitors or nonvisitors. Nonvisitors were younger and had better OHRQoL than the others. The differences in the service use by gender, economic situation, and dental fear were small. CONCLUSIONS: Service use during the pilot depended on the subjective oral health. Our findings highlight the potential of reminders in increasing care use among those with perceived need for services.

Research transparency in dental research: A programmatic analysis.

We assessed adherence to five transparency practices-data sharing, code sharing, conflict of interest disclosure, funding disclosure, and protocol registration-in articles in dental journals. We searched and exported the full text of all research articles from PubMed-indexed dental journals available in the Europe PubMed Central database until the end of 2021. We programmatically assessed their adherence to the five transparency practices using a validated and automated tool. Journal- and article-related information was retrieved from ScimagoJR and Journal Citation Reports. Of all 329,784 articles published in PubMed-indexed dental journals, 10,659 (3.2%) were available to download. Of those, 77% included a conflict of interest disclosure, and 62% included a funding disclosure. Seven percent of the articles had a registered protocol. Data sharing (2.0%) and code sharing (0.1%) were rarer. Sixteen percent of articles did not adhere to any of the five transparency practices, 29% adhered to one, 48% adhered to two, 7.0% adhered to three, 0.3% adhered to four, and no article adhered to all five practices. Adherence to transparency practices increased over time; however, data and code sharing especially remained rare. Coordinated efforts involving all stakeholders are needed to change current transparency practices in dental research.

Reporting of absolute and relative risk measures in oral health and cardiovascular events studies: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the magnitude of risk of health events, such as cardiovascular diseases (CVD), related to poor oral health, both relative and absolute risk measures should be reported. Our aim was to investigate the extent to which absolute and relative measures of risk are reported in longitudinal studies that assess the association between oral health indicators (OHIs) and CVD. METHODS: A systematic search of longitudinal studies investigating the association of any OHI with CVD was carried out using the Embase, Medline and Cochrane library databases. The search covered each database from its inception date to August 2021. Data about reporting relative and absolute risks of the relationship between CVD and OHI from the abstract were extracted. If the relative risk for OHIs and CVD was reported in the abstract, then the underlying absolute risks were searched from the full text, and it was assessed whether it was similarly adjusted for confounding than was the relative risk in the abstract. RESULTS: One hundred-six articles were included. From these, 85 (80%) studies reported the association of OHIs and CVD with one or more relative risks in the abstract. Of those 85 studies, the underlying absolute risks were accessible or calculable from the abstract or full text of 60 studies. However, of these 60 studies, in only 10 (12%), the underlying absolute risks were similarly adjusted, as were the relative risks in the abstract. The absolute risks of CVD by OHIs were rarely reported without corresponding relative risks in the abstract (n = 2, 2%). Median absolute risk difference in the CVD risk between exposure levels to which the first relative risk in the abstract referred was 1.8% (interquartile range 0.6-4.6, n = 63). CONCLUSIONS: Focusing on relative risks over absolute risks was a common practice in literature. Reporting similarly adjusted underlying absolute risks of relative risks was rare in most studies, despite those being helpful for comprehending the magnitude of CVD-risk increase related to poor oral health. Current reporting practices could lead to an overinterpretation of risk increase of CVD related to poor oral health.

Effects of universal oral healthcare coverage in an adult population: A long-term nationwide natural experiment.

OBJECTIVES: A large and long-term natural experiment occurred in Finland from the late 1980s-2000, when adults' entitlement to subsidized oral healthcare was strongly dependent on the arbitrary classification based on their year of birth: people born in 1956 or later were entitled to subsidized care, while people born before 1956 were not. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of this expanded universal oral healthcare coverage on service use and oral health outcomes. METHODS: Data from annual nationally representative cross-sectional postal surveys among 15-64-year-olds between 1990 and 2014 were used. For this study, the following outcome variables were formed: experiencing toothache during the past month (yes/no), the number of missing teeth with three different thresholds (over 10, over 5 or at least 1 missing tooth), brushing more than once a day and the number of visits to the dentist. Regression discontinuity plots and bias-corrected local polynomial regression discontinuity estimators measuring the effect of the extended universal coverage on the outcomes at the year-of-birth cut-off of 1956 were generated separately from the data from 1990 to 2000 and from 2002 to 2014. RESULTS: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of visits to the dentist (0.2 visits, 95% CI, confidence intervals: -0.03; 0.43) and the proportion of those who visited the dentist during the past 12 months (4.2%, 95% CI: 0.1%; 8.3%) increased at the year-of-birth cut-off of 1956. There were minor drops (1.5%-1.9%) in the number of missing teeth across all thresholds (over 10, over 5, or at least 1 missing teeth) at the cut-off. Analyses with the data from the surveys from 2002 to 2014 showed that there were no discontinuities in these outcomes at the cut-off of 1956. Regression discontinuity estimates related to toothache experience and toothbrushing frequency were inconclusive due to high variability in the underlying data and the likely small effect of the more universal coverage on these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The current study provided evidence of the beneficial effects of universal oral healthcare coverage on the oral healthcare service use and teeth preservation from a large and long-term natural experiment occurred in Finland from the late 1980s to 2000.

Randomized controlled trials in de-implementation research: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare costs are rising, and a substantial proportion of medical care is of little value. De-implementation of low-value practices is important for improving overall health outcomes and reducing costs. We aimed to identify and synthesize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on de-implementation interventions and to provide guidance to improve future research. METHODS: MEDLINE and Scopus up to May 24, 2021, for individual and cluster RCTs comparing de-implementation interventions to usual care, another intervention, or placebo. We applied independent duplicate assessment of eligibility, study characteristics, outcomes, intervention categories, implementation theories, and risk of bias. RESULTS: Of the 227 eligible trials, 145 (64%) were cluster randomized trials (median 24 clusters; median follow-up time 305 days), and 82 (36%) were individually randomized trials (median follow-up time 274 days). Of the trials, 118 (52%) were published after 2010, 149 (66%) were conducted in a primary care setting, 163 (72%) aimed to reduce the use of drug treatment, 194 (85%) measured the total volume of care, and 64 (28%) low-value care use as outcomes. Of the trials, 48 (21%) described a theoretical basis for the intervention, and 40 (18%) had the study tailored by context-specific factors. Of the de-implementation interventions, 193 (85%) were targeted at physicians, 115 (51%) tested educational sessions, and 152 (67%) multicomponent interventions. Missing data led to high risk of bias in 137 (60%) trials, followed by baseline imbalances in 99 (44%), and deficiencies in allocation concealment in 56 (25%). CONCLUSIONS: De-implementation trials were mainly conducted in primary care and typically aimed to reduce low-value drug treatments. Limitations of current de-implementation research may have led to unreliable effect estimates and decreased clinical applicability of studied de-implementation strategies. We identified potential research gaps, including de-implementation in secondary and tertiary care settings, and interventions targeted at other than physicians. Future trials could be improved by favoring simpler intervention designs, better control of potential confounders, larger number of clusters in cluster trials, considering context-specific factors when planning the intervention (tailoring), and using a theoretical basis in intervention design. REGISTRATION: OSF Open Science Framework hk4b2.

The use of the phrase "data not shown" in dental research.

OBJECTIVE: The use of phrases such as "data/results not shown" is deemed an obscure way to represent scientific findings. Our aim was to investigate how frequently papers published in dental journals use the phrases and what kind of results the authors referred to with these phrases in 2021. METHODS: We searched the Europe PubMed Central (PMC) database for open-access articles available from studies published in PubMed-indexed dental journals until December 31st, 2021. We searched for "data/results not shown" phrases from the full texts and then calculated the proportion of articles with the phrases in all the available articles. From studies published in 2021, we evaluated whether the phrases referred to confirmatory results, negative results, peripheral results, sensitivity analysis results, future results, or other/unclear results. Journal- and publisher-related differences in publishing studies with the phrases in 2021 were tested with Fisher's exact test using the R v4.1.1 software. RESULTS: The percentage of studies with the relevant phrases from the total number of studies in the database decreased from 13% to 3% between 2010 and 2020. In 2021, out of 2,434 studies published in 73 different journals by eight publishers, 67 (2.8%) used the phrases. Potential journal- and publisher-related differences in publishing studies with the phrases were detected in 2021 (p = 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). Most commonly, the phrases referred to negative (n = 16, 24%), peripheral (n = 22, 33%) or confirmatory (n = 11, 16%) results. The significance of unpublished results to which the phrases referred considerably varied across studies. CONCLUSION: Over the last decade, there has been a marked decrease in the use of the phrases "data/results not shown" in dental journals. However, the phrases were still notably in use in dental studies in 2021, despite the good availability of accessible free online supplements and repositories.

Transparency of COVID-19-Related Research in Dental Journals.

Objective: We aimed to assess the adherence to transparency practices (data availability, code availability, statements of protocol registration and conflicts of interest and funding disclosures) and FAIRness (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) of shared data from open access COVID-19-related articles published in dental journals available from the Europe PubMed Central (PMC) database. Methods: We searched and exported all COVID-19-related open-access articles from PubMed-indexed dental journals available in the Europe PMC database in 2020 and 2021. We detected transparency indicators with a validated and automated tool developed to extract the indicators from the downloaded articles. Basic journal- and article-related information was retrieved from the PMC database. Then, from those which had shared data, we assessed their accordance with FAIR data principles using the F-UJI online tool (f-uji.net). Results: Of 650 available articles published in 59 dental journals, 74% provided conflicts of interest disclosure and 40% funding disclosure and 4% were preregistered. One study shared raw data (0.15%) and no study shared code. Transparent practices were more common in articles published in journals with higher impact factors, and in 2020 than in 2021. Adherence to the FAIR principles in the only paper that shared data was moderate. Conclusion: While the majority of the papers had a COI disclosure, the prevalence of the other transparency practices was far from the acceptable level. A much stronger commitment to open science practices, particularly to preregistration, data and code sharing, is needed from all stakeholders.

Oral health care quality as viewed by leading dentists and their superiors - a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate how leading dentists and their superiors view oral health care quality, as they are in key positions to pursue high-quality care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We interviewed five leading dentists and three of their superiors from Southern Finland via semi-structured telephone interviews including themes based on the Institute of Medicine's six quality dimensions. The material was analysed using theory-driven content analysis. RESULTS: Participants divided safety into occupational, instrumental and patient safety and considered timeliness as timing treatment clinically correctly. They also linked timeliness to patient-centeredness with wider opening-hours and quick access to care. Effective care was considered as a prerequisite for efficiency. Participants saw effectiveness as treating the illness, not the number of treatment measures. Leading dentists took survival time of fillings and cost per operation as a measurement of efficiency, and the superiors measured efficiency by the number of treated patients or visits. The leading dentists considered the equal treatment of patients, whereas the superiors took the amount of care provided with public resources and co-workers into consideration. CONCLUSIONS: The participants shared similar views of oral health care quality which should enable cooperation. Observed minor differences relate to professional background and leading positions.

Age-Period-Cohort Analysis of Toothbrushing Frequency in Finnish Adults: Results From Annual National Cross-Sectional Surveys From 1978 to 2014.

OBJECTIVES: No previous study has analysed age-, period-, and cohort-related long-term trends in toothbrushing frequency among adults using a nationally representative data set. Our aim was to study age, period, and cohort effects on toothbrushing among 15- to 64-year-olds in Finland from 1978 to 2014. METHODS: Data were gathered by nationally representative random cross-sectional samples of 15- to 64-year-old Finns annually from 1978 to 2014, during which response rates decreased from 84% to 53%. The final pooled sample size was 119,665. An age-period-cohort model was used to separate the effects of age, period, and cohort on trends in men's and women's toothbrushing frequency. RESULTS: From 1978 to 2014, the proportion of respondents who brushed at least twice a day or once a day increased from 42% to 66% and from 83% to 95%, respectively. The proportion of respondents who brushed at least twice a day increased from 27% to 53% among men and from 60% to 75% among women. Increases in at least once-a-day toothbrushing were smaller in both sexes, and in women the increase was minimal over the study years. The increase in toothbrushing frequency occurred particularly among those older than 40 years of age. In men, toothbrushing frequency increased steadily cohort by cohort (cohort effect) and within a single cohort as men in the cohort got older (longitudinal age trend). Instead, in women the cohort effect and longitudinal age trend in toothbrushing were smaller at both frequency thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: On the population level, favourable changes in toothbrushing habits occurred among adult Finns from 1978 to 2014, especially in men.

Statements considering intervention effects in Finnish clinical practice guidelines: Recommending interventions with non-numeric effect-sizes or unspecified outcomes.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Representation of benefits and harms associated with specific interventions in an understandable and comparable way is crucial for informed decision making that clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) aim to enhance. Therefore, we investigated how statements concerning the effects of interventions considered and described benefits and harms, magnitude of effect and its uncertainty, numeric and non-numeric information, and outcomes in Finnish CPGs. METHODS: We selected 10 CPGs on common diseases and risk factors published by The Finnish Medical Society, Duodecim. All the statements which were graded with the level of evidence from high to very low (levels A-D) were included in analyses. From these statements, assessments were made regarding whether the statement considered benefits or harms, whether relative or absolute numeric measures were shown, whether the statement supported or was against the intervention considered, and what outcome was reported. RESULTS: Of the 10 CPGs, 448 statements were assessed. Most of the statements of effects considered intervention benefits (87%) rather than harms. Half of the statements considering harms were represented in a way that supported the intervention. Most of the statements (94%) did not include numeric estimates of magnitude of the effect. When numeric estimates of magnitude of the effect were present, they were most frequently relative measures and were typically placed in a statement considering (a) intervention benefits with a primary outcome, (b) given the grade of A for level of evidence, and (c) that supported the use of intervention. CONCLUSIONS: In the Finnish CPGs, the statements were rarely framed with both absolute and relative numeric measures of an intervention's effect. Harms were rarely reported with a grade indicating the level of evidence. The users of CPGs would benefit from more consistent and understandable framing of statements considering both benefits and harms of interventions.

Verbal communication of effect-sizes, possible comparators, and uncertainty of evidence in the Finnish clinical practice guidelines: Omitting effect-sizes and comparators without expressing much uncertainty.

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to investigate verbal representations of intervention effect-size, uncertainty of evidence, and possible intervention comparators in statements concerning effects of interventions in Finnish clinical practice guidelines. METHOD: We selected 10 clinical practice guidelines on common diseases and risk factors published by The Finnish Medical Society Duodecim. All the statements that considered beneficial effects of interventions and that were graded with a level of evidence (levels A, high, to D, very low) were included in analyses. We assessed whether the statements verbally represented intervention effect-size, uncertainty of evidence or a possible comparator, and the reported outcome. RESULTS: Of 385 statements, verbal representation of beneficial effect-sizes occurred in 25 (6%) statements. Most (72%) statements indicated that intervention had a beneficial effect, but did not specify effect-size. Less than half (42%) of the statements represented uncertainty verbally. Comparisons to placebo or no-treatment were rare (3%) and 18% of the statements compared interventions to other treatments. Against instructions, a considerable part (35%) of statements with B-level evidence did not represent uncertainty. CONCLUSION: Communicating beneficial intervention effects, effect-sizes, possible comparators, and uncertainty of evidence require much broader attention in the clinical practice guideline context.

Is the technical quality of root fillings associated with socioeconomic status? A cross-sectional study among Finnish adults.

We investigated differences in the technical quality of root fillings according to socioeconomic status. In the Finnish Health 2000 Survey, which comprised a sample of 8,028 adults aged over 29 yr, 6,115 underwent panoramic radiography. A total of 7,986 endodontically treated teeth were detected among 3,095 participants. The criterion for a technically inadequate root filling was a distance from the root filling to the root apex of over 3 mm or a filling extruding beyond the apex. Educational level, employment status, and income were the measures of socioeconomic status. Differences in the frequency of inadequate root fillings according to socioeconomic status were investigated using a multilevel logistic mixed-effects model taking into account age, gender, number of teeth, and type of root filled tooth. Almost half (46%) of the root fillings were inadequate. Among the over 64-yr-olds, higher education and higher income were associated with a higher probability of having an inadequate root filling. Among the under 65-yr-olds, socioeconomic status was not associated with root filling quality. Contrary to expectation, lower socioeconomic status was not associated with poorer endodontic treatment quality; however, higher income and higher education was associated with higher odds for inadequate root fillings among the over 64-yr-olds.

Twenty-five-year follow-up of educational differences in toothache prevalence.

OBJECTIVES: Nationally representative studies on socioeconomic differences in toothache prevalence are very limited, especially with a long follow-up period. Our aim was to examine the education-related differences in toothache prevalence among 25- to 64-year-olds in Finland during 1990-2014. METHODS: We used data from the Health Behaviour and Health Among the Finnish Adult Population surveys. Data were gathered by random samples of 15- to 64-year-old Finns annually between 1990 and 2014. Response rates decreased during this period from 76% (n = 3812) to 53% (n = 2630). Our final pooled total sample size was 63 372 after exclusion of edentate participants and missing data. Relative educational level was used to measure socioeconomic position. In addition to basic tabulations, educational differences in toothache prevalence during the past month were investigated using the multiple additive regression tree for mediation analysis. RESULTS: The proportion of respondents who reported having had toothache during the past month increased from 7% to 12% from 1990 to 2014. Educational differences in toothache prevalence were small for the whole study period, especially in women. Men with high relative education had a lower toothache prevalence than people with low relative education during 1990-1994 and 2010-2014. This stemmed from the direct effect of relative education and the indirect effects of toothbrushing frequency, number of missing teeth and perceived health. In both sexes, those with middle-level relative education had higher toothache prevalence than people with low relative education 1995-2009. CONCLUSIONS: During 1990-2014, toothache prevalence increased among 25- to 64-year-olds in Finland. Since the mid-1990s, differences in toothache prevalence by relative education remained very small in both sexes. More actions are needed to understand reasons behind the clearly increased toothache prevalence in Finland during the last decades.