Skip to main content

Table 1 Tests for evidential value and data-dredging across dental specialties. Evidence of data-dredging was there across the disciplines

From: Significance bias: an empirical evaluation of the oral health literature

Discipline Frequency 0 to 0.025 0.026-0.05 Test for evidential value 0.04-0.045 0.046-0.05 Test for data-dredging
General Dentistry 10948 (25 %) 5366 4108 0.57 [0.62, 0.64] 212 3364 0.059 [0.052, 0.067]
Surgery 8605 (19 %) 4372 2564 0.63 [0.62, 0.64] 348 1523 0.19 [0.17, 0.20]
Public Health Dentistry 1805 (4 %) 1122 478 0.70 [0.68, 0.72] 62 315 0.17 [0.13, 0.20]
Dental Materials 821 (2 %) 325 392 0.45 [0.42, 0.49] 1 355 0.0046 [0.00015, 0.013]
Pedodontics 490 (1 %) 246 184 0.57 [0.53, 0.62] 22 114 0.17 [0.11, 0.23]
Gerodonlogy 922 (2 %) 445 316 0.58 [0.55, 0.62] 26 223 0.11 [0.071, 0.15]
Endodontics 5456 (12 %) 2309 2468 0.48 [0.47, 0.50] 109 2133 0.049 [0.040, 0.058]
Orthodontics 2265 (5 %) 1229 736 0.63 [0.60, 0.65] 80 545 0.13 [0.10, 0.16]
Implantology 553 (1 %) 267 170 0.61 [0.57, 0.66] 19 113 0.15 [0.091, 0.21]
Periodontics 8770 (20 %) 4666 3048 0.60 [0.59, 0.62] 298 2074 0.13 [0.11, 0.14]
Cariology 945 (2 %) 565 280 0.67 [0.64, 0.70] 24 189 0.12 [0.075, 0.16]
Oral Hygiene 438 (1 %) 242 146 0.62 [0.58, 0.67] 16 89 0.16 [0.091, 0.23]
Prosthodontics 2231 (5 %) 1311 493 0.73 [0.71, 0.75] 33 338 0.09 [0.062, 0.12]
  1. The only specialty with evidential value was dental materials