MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416076025 · doi:10.1186/s12903-025-07102-y

The impact of a personalized oral health instruction form on oral health indices in institutionalized older adults: a randomized, controlled, single-blinded clinical trial

2025· article· en· W4416076025 on OpenAlexaff
Najla Chebib, Sara Rotzinger, Nadia Maccarone-Ruetsche, Roger Sioufi, Philippe Mojon, Frauke Müller

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Oral Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersUniversité de Genève
KeywordsClinical trialOral healthOral and maxillofacial surgeryAlternative medicineMEDLINEResearch ethicsEthics committeePublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This RCT aimed to test the impact of an educational intervention, supported by a Personalized Oral Health Instruction Form (POIF), on oral health indices in institutionalized older adults. METHODS: Older adults aged 65 years and above living in a long-term care facility were recruited. Baseline oral health indices were recorded for all participants. Caregivers received training on oral health care in small groups. Custom-made software was used to create a POIF for each participant, which was then implemented alongside verbal instructions and the provision of an oral hygiene kit in the intervention group, whereas in the control group, the participants received verbal instructions and an oral hygiene kit only. After three weeks, a second examination was conducted by the same examiner, who was blinded to participants' group allocation. Plaque index (PI), denture cleanliness (DCI), and tongue coating (TCI) were recorded at baseline and after intervention. Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), assessed at baseline and after intervention using the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI). Wilcoxon signed rank tests were conducted with the level of significance set at P<0.05. RESULTS: A total of 46 patients (mean age: 85.5 ± 7.7 years) were included. Plaque index (PI) significantly decreased in both groups from baseline to postintervention (p < 0.001), with a significantly lower median score in the intervention group (31.6%, IQR=51.1) than in the control group (53.9%, IQR=51.1; P = 0.023). DCI improved significantly within the intervention group (Wilcoxon P = 0.046), with a greater proportion of patients showing no visible plaque after the intervention than at baseline (66.7% vs. 33.3%). TCI did not change significantly over time in either group (n.s.). A combined hygiene outcome based on the PI and DCI showed significantly better plaque control in the intervention group (P =0.006). GOHAI total score increased from 50 (IQR=9) to 54 (IQR= 4). This improvement was statistically significant within the intervention group (P = 0.006), whereas it was not significant between groups at the final assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The findings confirm that POIFs using tailored, visually supported, printed oral health guidance improve oral health outcomes in institutionalized older adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was approved by the ethics committee of the canton of Geneva (CCER 2022--00086) and registered on the Swiss national registry for clinical trials (SNCTP000004829) and was retrospectively registered on clinical trials with the registration number NCT07063927 on 2025-07-02.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Oral HealthSame topicDental Health and Care UtilizationFrench-language works237,207