The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
High-fluoride toothpaste: a multicenter randomized controlled trial in adults
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this single – blind, multicenter, parallel, randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of the application of a high‐fluoride toothpaste on root caries in adults. Methods: Adult patients (n = 130, ♂ = 74, ♀ = 56; mean age ± SD: 56.9 ± 12.9) from three participating centers, diagnosed with root caries, were randomly allocated into two groups: Test (n = 64, ♂ = 37, ♀ = 27; lesions = 144; mean age: 59.0 ± 12.1; intervention: high‐fluoride toothpaste with 5000 ppm F), and Control (n = 66, ♂ = 37, ♀ = 29; lesions = 160; mean age: 54.8 ± 13.5; intervention: regular‐fluoride toothpaste with 1350 ppm F) groups. Clinical examinations and surface hardness scoring of the carious lesions were performed for each subject at specified time intervals (T0 – at baseline before intervention, T1 – at 3 months and T2 – at 6 months after intervention). Mean surface hardness scores (HS) were calculated for each patient. Statistical analyses comprised of two‐way analysis of variance and post hoc comparisons using the B onferroni–D unn correction. Results: At T0, there was no statistical difference between the two groups with regard to gender (P = 0.0682, unpaired t‐test), or age (P = 0.9786, chi‐squared test), and for the overall HS (Test group: HS = 3.4 ± 0.61; Control group: HS = 3.4 ± 0.66; P = 0.8757, unpaired t‐test). The anova revealed significantly better HS for the test group than for the control groups (T1: Test group: HS = 2.9 ± 0.67; Control group: HS = 3.1 ± 0.75; T2: T est group: HS = 2.4 ± 0.81; Control group: HS = 2.8 ± 0.79; P < 0.0001). However, the interaction term time‐point*group was not significant. Conclusions: The application of a high‐fluoride containing dentifrice (5000 ppm F) in adults, twice daily, significantly improves the surface hardness of otherwise untreated root caries lesions when compared with the use of regular fluoride containing (1350 ppm F) toothpastes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Therefore, this model could be used to estimate the anti-caries potential of innovative toothpaste formulations with low fluoride concentration [46] that could be recommended to control enamel caries in children, and formulations with high fluoride concentrations, that have been suggested to control root caries in elderly people [19, 21, 22].”
From Validation of a Cariogenic Biofilm Model to Evaluate the Effect of Fluoride on Enamel and Root Dentine Demineralization (2016) · cites this paper as [21]
In the citing paper
“For dentine, higher fluoride concentration [19–23], higher frequency of use [24], or combination of methods of fluoride delivery [25] should be necessary to control caries; however, the evidence is not conclusive.”
From Validation of a Cariogenic Biofilm Model to Evaluate the Effect of Fluoride on Enamel and Root Dentine Demineralization (2016) · cites this paper as [21]
In the citing paper
“which support clinical data suggesting that more fluoride would be required to control root caries [19, 21, 22] than that used for enamel.”
From Validation of a Cariogenic Biofilm Model to Evaluate the Effect of Fluoride on Enamel and Root Dentine Demineralization (2016) · cites this paper as [21]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials
Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., Moher, D., & for the CONSORT Group* (2010) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-152-11-201006010-00232 · Cited by 3,824
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 43
- 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1997.tb00231.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1996.tb00104.x · DOI · Paper page
- Clarkson JE, 1993, A comprehensive summary of fluoride dentifrice caries clinical trials, Am J Dent, 6, S59
- 10.1034/j.1601-5037.2003.00001.x · DOI
- 10.1177/154405910708600807 · DOI
- 10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0261 · DOI
- 10.1177/00220345960750070401 · DOI
- Warren JJ, 1999, A review of fluoride dentifrice related to dental fluorosis, Pediatr Dent, 21, 265
- McGrady MG, 2010, Why fluoride?, Dent Update, 37, 595, 10.12968/denu.2010.37.9.595 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF03262681 · DOI
- 10.1159/000261354 · DOI
- 10.1177/00220345970760110901 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1988.tb00574.x · DOI
- Davies GM, 2002, A randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of providing free fluoride toothpaste from the age of 12 months on reducing caries in 5–6 year old children, Community Dent Health, 19, 131
- 10.1111/j.1741-2358.2011.00560.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1741-2358.2006.00118.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1741-2358.2002.00080.x · DOI
- 10.1177/00220345970760120701 · DOI
- Lynch E, 2000, Effectiveness of two fluoride dentifrices to arrest root carious lesions, Am J Dent, 13, 218
- 10.1111/j.1741-2358.2007.00200.x · DOI
- 10.1177/00220345930720031201 · DOI
- 10.1159/000047429 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/00220345880670110601 · DOI
- 10.1902/jop.1987.58.7.460 · DOI
- 10.1902/jop.1967.38.6.610 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1159/000275573 · DOI
- 10.1159/000261600 · DOI
- 10.1159/000320364 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1754-4505.1997.tb00866.x · DOI
- 10.1038/sj.bdj.4806140 · DOI
- 10.1002/j.0022-0337.1993.57.12.tb02819.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1754-4505.1998.tb01139.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1741-2358.2001.00095.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1991.tb00137.x · DOI
- 10.1177/154405910808701019 · DOI
- 10.1186/1756-0500-2-147 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0300-5712(02)00045-3 · DOI
- 10.1159/000049113 · DOI
- Baysan A, 2004, Effect of ozone on the oral microbiota and clinical severity of primary root caries, Am J Dent, 17, 56
- 10.1308/135576106775193897 · DOI
- Baysan A, 2007, Clinical reversal of root caries using ozone: 6‐month results, Am J Dent, 20, 203
- 10.1007/s00455-004-0013-6 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fernández, C. E., Tenuta, L. M. A., & Cury, J. A. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0146478 · Cited by 74
Metadata
- Authors
- Srinivasan, M., Schimmel, M., Riesen, M., Ilgner, A., Wicht, M. J., Warncke, M., Ellwood, R. P., Nitschke, I., Müller, F., & Noack, M. J.
- Affiliations
- Division of Gerodontology and Removable Prosthodontics School of Dental Medicine University of Geneva Geneva Switzerland
- Department of Prosthodontics and Materials Science Center for Dental, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery University of Leipzig Leipzig Germany
- Department of Operative Dentistry and Periodontology Centre of Dental Medicine University of Cologne Cologne Germany
- Medical Research Department Colgate Palmolive Company Hamburg Germany
- Colgate Palmolive Dental Health Unit Williams House Manchester Science Park Manchester UK
- Venue
- Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-12-20
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 333-340
- ISSN
- 0301-5661
- 1600-0528
- PMC
- PMC4282025
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
- Funders
- Colgate-Palmolive Company (n/a)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review