PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 451 records · Page 25Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Reaching consensus on the National Dental Hygiene Research Agenda: a Delphi study. American Dental Hygienists Association Council on Research.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to achieve consensus on specific research topics under the national dental hygiene research agenda categories developed by the ADHA Council on Research. METHODS: A Delphi technique was used to survey a group of 48 dental hygiene experts to gain consensus about the appropriateness of topics for dental hygiene research. The study was carried out in three phases: a development and pilot-testing phase and two rounds of mailed surveys. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Instrument reliability was analyzed using the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient and Cronbach's Alpha for internal consistency. RESULTS: Sixty-six topics reflective of the research agenda categories were identified through the first phase. Return rates of 100% and 94% were achieved for the two survey rounds. Instrument reliability was established at .91 and internal consistency at .94. After two rounds, consensus was reached on 37 of the 66 topics. CONCLUSIONS: Each of the categories comprising the ADHA national dental hygiene research agenda was well represented by the 37 topics. This finding provided evidence that there was consensus on the national agenda. However, reaching consensus is just the first step in the development of a long-range plan to guide research efforts and to promote depth in the development of a body of knowledge based on scientific inquiry.

Delphi Technique↗
PubMed1993

Statistical considerations related to a meta-analytic evaluation of published caries clinical studies comparing the anticaries efficacy of dentifrices containing sodium fluoride and sodium monofluorophosphate.

The comparison of the anticaries efficacy of dentifrices containing sodium fluoride (NaF) and sodium monofluorophosphate (SMFP) has recently been addressed through a meta-analysis of published head-to-head clinical trials. Such an analysis is used to provide an omnibus conclusion on the basis of summary information obtained from several individual studies. An important aspect of a meta-analysis is the determination of which studies from among those available in the relevant literature are to be incorporated into the calculations. The statistical literature provides several perspectives with respect to this issue. A recently-published meta-analysis by Johnson (1993) resulted in the conclusion that dentifrices containing NaF provide significantly lower caries increments than do those containing SMFP. However, a similar analysis utilizing studies identified by Volpe, Petrone & Davies (1993) suggests that no such significant difference exists. The resolution of such conflicting results rests on clinical judgment concerning the issue of study inclusion. The clinical significance of the results of both of these analyses was considered. Despite the differences in the analyses, both support the conclusion that dentifrices containing SMFP provide equivalent anticaries protection as do those containing NaF, in accordance with the standards established in the current American Dental Association Guidelines for the comparison of fluoride dentifrices.

American Dental Association↗