Cited by 25Delphi Technique in ResearchOral microbiology and periodontitis researchClinical practice guidelines implementation

Developing a core outcome set for periodontal trials

Open access
Lamont, Thomas J., Clarkson, Jan E., Ricketts, David N. J., Heasman, Peter A., Ramsay, Craig R., Gillies, Katie·2021·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is no agreement which outcomes should be measured when investigating interventions for periodontal diseases. It is difficult to compare or combine studies with different outcomes; resulting in research wastage and uncertainty for patients and healthcare professionals. OBJECTIVE: Develop a core outcome set (COS) relevant to key stakeholders for use in effectiveness trials investigating prevention and management of periodontal diseases. METHODS: Mixed method study involving literature review; online Delphi Study; and face-to-face consensus meeting. PARTICIPANTS: Key stakeholders: patients, dentists, hygienist/therapists, periodontists, researchers. RESULTS: The literature review identified 37 unique outcomes. Delphi round 1: 20 patients and 51 dental professional and researchers prioritised 25 and suggested an additional 11 outcomes. Delphi round 2: from the resulting 36 outcomes, 13 patients and 39 dental professionals and researchers prioritised 22 outcomes. A face-to-face consensus meeting was hosted in Dundee, Scotland by an independent chair. Eight patients and six dental professional and researchers participated. The final COS contains: Probing depths, Quality of life, Quantified levels of gingivitis, Quantified levels of plaque, Tooth loss. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of this COS will ensure the results of future effectiveness trials for periodontal diseases are more relevant to patients and dental professionals, reducing research wastage. This could reduce uncertainty for patients and dental professionals by ensuring the evidence used to inform their choices is meaningful to them. It could also strengthen the quality and certainty of the evidence about the relative effectiveness of interventions. REGISTRATION: COMET Database: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/265?result=true.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0254123

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lamont, T. J., Clarkson, J. E., Ricketts, D. N. J., Heasman, P. A., Ramsay, C. R., & Gillies, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Dundee (GB)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
Corresponding author
Lamont, Thomas J.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2021-07-22
Volume
16
Issue
7
Pages
e0254123
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3185028374
Cited by
25
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1
FWCI
5.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity) (cc-by)
Funders
Tattershall Fund
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Keywords
core outcome set, periodontal disease, periodontal disease prevention, periodontal disease management, outcome prioritization, probing depth, gingivitis, dental plaque, tooth loss, quality of life, stakeholder consensus, effectiveness trials
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Delphi Technique, Female, Humans, Male, Periodontal Diseases, Quality of Life, Endpoint Determination

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