MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383889150 · doi:10.2196/46143

The Use of Patient-Oriented Mobile Phone Apps in Oral Health: Scoping Review

2023· article· en· W4383889150 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elina Väyrynen, Sanna Hakola, Anniina Keski-Salmi, Hannaleena Jämsä, Raija Vainionpää, Saujanya Karki

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundSuomen Hammaslääkäriseura Apollonia
KeywordsMobile phoneMedicineOral healthScopusInclusion (mineral)mHealthMEDLINEFamily medicinePsychologyPsychological interventionNursingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Oral health is a significant part of general health. Poor oral health can influence an individual's appearance, self-esteem, eating, and speaking. The use of mobile phone apps has been growing in the field of medicine, including dentistry. However, to date, there is no evidence related to the availability of mobile apps focusing on various branches of dentistry. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review the scientific literature on the use of patient-oriented mobile phone apps in oral health and summarize the key findings. METHODS: A scoping review of published scientific literature on the use of patient-oriented mobile phone apps in oral health was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute. A search was performed in PubMed and Scopus for studies published between January 2000 and June 2021 that were written in English. All study types except for those reporting developmental protocols were included in this review. In total, 2 reviewers independently screened the studies using the eligibility criteria. The study protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework registries in June 2021. RESULTS: The initial search yielded a total of 977 studies, 45 (4.6%) of which met the inclusion criteria. All the studies (45/45, 100%) were published after 2009. Most studies (31/45, 69%) concerned oral health promotion using mobile phone apps, followed by behavior management (5/45, 11%). More than half (23/45, 51%) of the included studies were conducted in Asian countries. Overall, 31% (14/45) of the studies focused on adolescents. A total of 51% (23/45) of the studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Approximately 39% (9/23) of the included RCT studies reported a substantial reduction in dental plaque, and 26% (6/23) of the studies reported significant improvement in gingival health. Regarding dental anxiety management, 13% (3/23) of the RCT studies reported a significant decrease in mean heart rate and lower Facial Image Scale scores. CONCLUSIONS: According to the literature, the use of mobile apps in oral health is increasing among patients, mainly children and adolescents. Many studies that have used mobile apps have focused on promoting oral health. However, other areas such as diagnostic and remote consultations (teledentistry) have until recently been neglected despite their great potential.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0210.021
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.182
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207