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