Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Nov 23;24(1):1431.
doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-05218-1.

Do randomised clinical trials on dental caries adopt Open Science practices?

Carolina de Picoli Acosta  1 , Jaisson Cenci  2   3 , Bruna Brondani  1 , Rokaia Ahmed Elagami  1   2 , Tatiana Pereira-Cenci  2 , Maximiliano Sergio Cenci  2 , Marie-Charlotte D N J M Huysmans  2 , Daniela Prócida Raggio  1 , Mariana Minatel Braga  1 , Fausto Medeiros Mendes  4   5
Affiliations

Do randomised clinical trials on dental caries adopt Open Science practices?

Carolina de Picoli Acosta et al. BMC Oral Health. .

Abstract

Background: Open Science Practices (OSPs) are essential when assessing research integrity and quality of Randomised Clinical Trials (RCTs). As dental caries represents a significant oral health burden, our objective was to identify and analyse the adoption of OSPs within RCTs focused on addressing this disease.

Methods: We searched PubMed to retrieve RCTs related to dental caries published from January 2000 to March 2022. Two independent researchers assessed a random sample of these articles to evaluate their eligibility until reaching the minimum sample size. Then, the same examiners reviewed the included texts regarding the OSPs adopted in the articles. The collected variables related to OSPs were reporting guidelines, protocol registration, detailed methodology available, open-source software, statistical analysis code sharing, statistical analysis plan, data sharing, open peer review, and open access. Association analyses using logistic regression were conducted considering the publication year, the continent of the first author, impact factor and open-access policy of the journals (explanatory variables), and adoption of at least one OSP or one OSP other than open access (outcomes). The recommendations for adopting OSPs were assessed by reviewing the "Instructions for Authors" section of the most frequently used journals where the included papers were published.

Results: 64.8% of the articles (95% Confidence Interval = 59.3-70.1%) adopted at least one OSP. However, no individual OSP was adopted by more than 50% of the articles. The most adopted practices were protocol registration (37.1%), the use of reporting guidelines (33.1%) and publishing open access (37.3%). These are also the OSPs most often recommended by journals in the Instructions for Authors. A few articles adopted other practices. Older articles presented a lower frequency of adopting these practices, and articles published in higher impact factor journals were positively associated with both outcomes.

Conclusion: The RCTs published on dental caries demonstrate a low frequency of adoption of most OSPs. However, a trend toward increased adoption of these practices has been notable in recent years.

Keywords: Data sharing; Dental caries; Open access; Open science; Randomized clinical trials; Research integrity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: MMB is a senior editor of BMC Oral Health. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart presenting the number of articles evaluated for eligibility included and analysed
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Frequency of adoption of Open Science Practices (OSPs) per year of study publication
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Wen PYF, Chen MX, Zhong YJ, Dong QQ, Wong HM. Global burden and inequality of dental caries, 1990 to 2019. J Dent Res. 2022;101(4):392–9. 10.1177/00220345211056247. - PubMed
    1. Haag DG, Peres KG, Balasubramanian M, Brennan DS. Oral conditions and health-related quality of life: a systematic review. J Dent Res. 2017;96(8):864–74. 10.1177/0022034517709737. - PubMed
    1. Baelum V. Caries management: technical solutions to biological problems or evidence-based care? J Oral Rehabil. 2008;35(2):135–51. 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01784.x. - PubMed
    1. Mejare IA, Klingberg G, Mowafi FK, Stecksen-Blicks C, Twetman SH, Tranaeus SH. A systematic map of systematic reviews in pediatric dentistry–what do we really know? PLoS ONE. 2015;10(2):e0117537. 10.1371/journal.pone.0117537. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brignardello-Petersen R, Carrasco-Labra A, Glick M, Guyatt GH, Azarpazhooh A. A practical approach to evidence-based dentistry: understanding and applying the principles of EBD. J Am Dent Assoc. 2014;145(11):1105–7. 10.14219/jada.2014.102. - PubMed