Dentists' Understanding of Diagnostic Test Results and Treatment Efficacy.

The Influence of Different Formats for Presenting Diagnostic Test Results and Treatment Efficacy on Dentists' Understanding and on Their Reported Clinical Management.

Status

Completed

Phases

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT03051295

Acronym

RCDENT2017

Enrollment

101

Registered

2017-02-13

Start date

2016-06-08

Completion date

2016-12-13

Last updated

2017-02-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Education

Keywords

Communication Barriers, Persuasive Communication, Risk

Brief summary

There is little evidence on how best to present diagnostic and treatment effect information to dentists and whether this makes any difference to their understanding of the information given and clinical management. The objective of this study is to assess the influence of different formats for presenting diagnostic test results and treatment efficacy on dentists' understanding and on their reported clinical management. The hypothesis is that presenting diagnostic test and treatment effectiveness results using natural frequencies influences the threshold for treatment and improves interpretation of tests results compared to conditional probabilities and percentage differences. A group of dentists recruited from postgraduate courses were randomized to two of four arms, being two arms of a hypothetical realistic diagnostic scenario (a) and two arms of a hypothetical realistic treatment scenario (b): a1) diagnostic test results presented in conditional probabilities; a2) diagnostic test results presented in natural frequencies; b1) treatment efficacy presented in percentages; b2) treatment efficacy presented in natural frequencies. The main outcome measures were the correct answer as to whether disease was actually present (post-test probability) and the correct answer as the number of patients that would benefit from the treatment (efficacy). Secondary outcome measures included the decision whether to treat or not treat the hypothetical patient.

Interventions

OTHERDental health information form

The format in which dentists receive information about diagnostic test results and efficacy of treatment.

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Healthy volunteers

Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Graduated dentist undergoing a postgraduate course in a public university in Rio de Janeiro.

Exclusion criteria

* None.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame	Description
The probability that a patient will have a dental cavity as assessed by a dentist.	Up to 20 minutes	The assessement by the dentist was based on a questionnarie containing a clinical hypothetical situation and the result of a bite-wing radiographic exam.
The number of patients that will benefit from systemic antibiotics adjunct to periodontal treatment as assessed by a dentist.	Up to 20 minutes	The assessement by the dentist was based on a questionnarie containing a clinical hypothetical situation and the information about the usual efficacy of systemic antibiotics adjunct to periodontal treatment.

Secondary

Measure	Time frame	Description
The number of dentists that would recommend the use of systemic antibiotics adjunct to periodontal treatment in the clinical management of a patient with periodontal disease.	Up to 20 minutes	The recommendation by the dentist was based on a questionnarie containing a clinical hypothetical situation and the information about the usual efficacy of systemic antibiotics adjunct to periodontal treatment.

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026