↓ Skip to main content

Cost‐effectiveness of caries‐preventive fluoride varnish applications in clinic settings among patients of low, moderate and high risk

Overview of attention for article published in Community Dentistry & Oral Epidemiology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Cost‐effectiveness of caries‐preventive fluoride varnish applications in clinic settings among patients of low, moderate and high risk
Published in
Community Dentistry & Oral Epidemiology, July 2017
DOI 10.1111/cdoe.12320
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The total body of evidence finds fluoride varnish effective to prevent caries. However, most trials were conducted in high-risk populations, with more recent trials on low-risk groups finding a lower efficacy. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of fluoride varnish application in clinic setting in populations with different caries risk. A mixed public-private-payer perspective in the context of German health care was performed using a lifetime Markov model. Effectiveness data were derived from an update of the most recent systematic Cochrane review and synthesized in three different risk groups according to control group caries increment via random-effects meta-analysis. Varnish was assumed to be applied twice yearly between age 6 and 18 years. Teeth with carious defects would be treated restoratively and could experience further follow-up treatments. Costs were deduced from German fee item catalogues. Monte Carlo microsimulations were used for to analyse lifetime treatment costs and caries increment (Euro/Decayed, Missing, Filled Teeth (DMFT)). In low-risk groups, fluoride varnish was nearly twice as costly and minimally more effective (293 Euro, 8.1 DMFT) than no varnish (163 Euro, 8.5 DMFT). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 343 Euro spent per avoided DMFT. The ICER was lower in medium-risk (ICER 93 Euro/DMFT) and high-risk groups (8 Euro/DMFT). Application of fluoride varnish in the clinic setting is unlikely to be cost-effective in low-risk populations. There is the need to either target high-risk groups or to provide fluoride varnish at lower costs, possibly in nonclinic settings.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 117 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Professor 6 5%
Other 25 21%
Unknown 44 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Psychology 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 50 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 July 2020.
All research outputs
#9,272,709
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from Community Dentistry & Oral Epidemiology
#501
of 1,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,302
of 359,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Community Dentistry & Oral Epidemiology
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,633 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 359,337 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.