ArticleJournal of periodontal research2025
What Do Patients Prefer in Periodontal and Implant Therapy? A Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of periodontal research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness of short implants (6-8.5 mm) compared to regular length implants (> 10 mm) with bone regeneration in posterior atrophic mandible: a 8-year microsimulation model.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Personalized Decision-Making in Periodontal Therapy: Systemic and Demographic Factors Influencing Surgical vs. Non-Surgical Re-Treatment.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of lifestyle behaviors on clinical outcomes of steps 1 and 2 of periodontal therapy in stage iii-iv periodontitis: a cohort study.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsUnderstanding and integrating patients' preferences into clinical practice can enhance personalized care, improve patient's adherence to treatment, and lead to better therapeutic outcomes. The aim of this scoping review was to map the existing literature investigating patients' preferences in periodontal and implant therapy while identifying key areas for future research and development.
methodsFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, an electronic search was conducted in four databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect) in July 2024 to identify studies evaluating patients' preferences for periodontal and implant therapy.
resultsThe literature search yielded 384 studies, of which eight articles met the inclusion criteria. These studies were conducted between 2003 and 2019 in Brazil, China, Austria, Italy, Germany, Canada, USA, Chile, France, Spain, and Portugal. A total of 1642 patients were included. Preferences were assessed using various quantitative and mixed methodologies. Results indicate a strong preference for treatments aimed at preserving teeth, favoring conservative approaches. When teeth cannot be restored, most patients prefer an implant-supported fixed partial denture to avoid damaging adjacent teeth with a conventional tooth-supported fixed partial denture. In this context, treatment predictability is ranked as the most important factor. While no sociodemographic factors appeared to be associated with preferences in periodontal treatments, several predictors were identified for dental implant therapy. Younger patients, women, individuals with higher education levels, and those with high perceived dental health showed a higher willingness to pay for dental implants.
conclusionThe literature on patients' preferences in periodontal and implant therapies is scarce. Several trends are identified but further longitudinal studies are needed to explore patients' preferences over time and the role of sociodemographic and cultural segmentation criteria.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.