Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis
Identifieur interne : 005948 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 005947; suivant : 005949Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis
Auteurs : Pieter Koele ; Johan HoogstratenSource :
- The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry [ 0022-3913 ] ; 1999.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Answer possibilities, Communicative ability, Complaint formulation, Complete dentures, Decoy scenarios, Degreesof freedom, Dent, Dental consultant, Dental consultants, Dental implant treatment, Dental implants, Dentistry, Denture, Dependent variables, Edentulous, Edentulous patients, Effect size, Fictitious patients, First question, First task, General practitioners, Health insurance, High risk perception, Hoogstraten, Implant, Implant treatment, Implant treatment costs, Important characteristics, Important factor, Important factors, Important patient factors, Interaction effects, Judgment strategy, Main effects, Main effects status, Many raters, Oral hygiene, Other dentists, Patient characteristics, Patient factors, Patient satisfaction, Personal appearance, Personal appearance comprehension risk perception error, Practitioner, Prosthet, Prosthet dent, Prosthetic dentistry, Psychosocial, Psychosocial aspects, Psychosocial characteristics, Psychosocial patient characteristics, Rank numbers, Rank order, Rank order task, Risk perception, Scenario, Scenario task, Second question, Second task, Significant interaction effects, Socioeconomic status, Substantial disagreement, Suitability, Suitability rating, Summary results, Treatment expectation, Variance.
- Teeft :
- Answer possibilities, Communicative ability, Complaint formulation, Complete dentures, Decoy scenarios, Degreesof freedom, Dent, Dental consultant, Dental consultants, Dental implant treatment, Dental implants, Dentistry, Denture, Dependent variables, Edentulous, Edentulous patients, Effect size, Fictitious patients, First question, First task, General practitioners, Health insurance, High risk perception, Hoogstraten, Implant, Implant treatment, Implant treatment costs, Important characteristics, Important factor, Important factors, Important patient factors, Interaction effects, Judgment strategy, Main effects, Main effects status, Many raters, Oral hygiene, Other dentists, Patient characteristics, Patient factors, Patient satisfaction, Personal appearance, Personal appearance comprehension risk perception error, Practitioner, Prosthet, Prosthet dent, Prosthetic dentistry, Psychosocial, Psychosocial aspects, Psychosocial characteristics, Psychosocial patient characteristics, Rank numbers, Rank order, Rank order task, Risk perception, Scenario, Scenario task, Second question, Second task, Significant interaction effects, Socioeconomic status, Substantial disagreement, Suitability, Suitability rating, Summary results, Treatment expectation, Variance.
Abstract
Statement of problem. Do psychosocial patient characteristics influence the decision of a dentist in recommending implant treatment?Purpose. This study assessed the importance that dental general practitioners attach to psychosocial patient characteristics when judging the suitability of these patients for dental implant treatment.Method and material. The judgment strategy of 30 Dutch dental practitioners was studied by using 2 tasks. Dentists first judged a series of written scenarios representing fictitious patients, each patient being characterized by 4 psychosocial aspects to determine the patients' suitability for implant treatment. The second task involved rank ordering 14 patient characteristics according to their importance in implant treatment decisions.Results. Dentists judged the personal appearance of the patient and, to a lesser degree, the patient's socioeconomic status to influence decisions to treat. However, these characteristics are ranked as quite unimportant in decision making, whereas motivation, oral hygiene, and level of neuroticism were the most important patient characteristics.Conclusions. The results on the 2 tasks were clearly not in agreement. There was a substantial disagreement between what dentists say to be important characteristics (rank order task) and the characteristics they actually use to judge the suitability for implant treatment (scenario task). Moreover, it appeared that agreement among the dentists is quite low, especially for the scenario task.
Url:
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(99)80017-1
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis</title><author><name sortKey="Koele, Pieter" sort="Koele, Pieter" uniqKey="Koele P" first="Pieter" last="Koele">Pieter Koele</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hoogstraten, Johan" sort="Hoogstraten, Johan" uniqKey="Hoogstraten J" first="Johan" last="Hoogstraten">Johan Hoogstraten</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10</idno><date when="1999" year="1999">1999</date><idno type="doi">10.1016/S0022-3913(99)80017-1</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">005948</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">005948</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis</title><author><name sortKey="Koele, Pieter" sort="Koele, Pieter" uniqKey="Koele P" first="Pieter" last="Koele">Pieter Koele</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hoogstraten, Johan" sort="Hoogstraten, Johan" uniqKey="Hoogstraten J" first="Johan" last="Hoogstraten">Johan Hoogstraten</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">YMPR</title><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1999">1999</date><biblScope unit="volume">81</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="476">476</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="480">480</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Answer possibilities</term><term>Communicative ability</term><term>Complaint formulation</term><term>Complete dentures</term><term>Decoy scenarios</term><term>Degreesof freedom</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dental consultant</term><term>Dental consultants</term><term>Dental implant treatment</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Dentistry</term><term>Denture</term><term>Dependent variables</term><term>Edentulous</term><term>Edentulous patients</term><term>Effect size</term><term>Fictitious patients</term><term>First question</term><term>First task</term><term>General practitioners</term><term>Health insurance</term><term>High risk perception</term><term>Hoogstraten</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant treatment</term><term>Implant treatment costs</term><term>Important characteristics</term><term>Important factor</term><term>Important factors</term><term>Important patient factors</term><term>Interaction effects</term><term>Judgment strategy</term><term>Main effects</term><term>Main effects status</term><term>Many raters</term><term>Oral hygiene</term><term>Other dentists</term><term>Patient characteristics</term><term>Patient factors</term><term>Patient satisfaction</term><term>Personal appearance</term><term>Personal appearance comprehension risk perception error</term><term>Practitioner</term><term>Prosthet</term><term>Prosthet dent</term><term>Prosthetic dentistry</term><term>Psychosocial</term><term>Psychosocial aspects</term><term>Psychosocial characteristics</term><term>Psychosocial patient characteristics</term><term>Rank numbers</term><term>Rank order</term><term>Rank order task</term><term>Risk perception</term><term>Scenario</term><term>Scenario task</term><term>Second question</term><term>Second task</term><term>Significant interaction effects</term><term>Socioeconomic status</term><term>Substantial disagreement</term><term>Suitability</term><term>Suitability rating</term><term>Summary results</term><term>Treatment expectation</term><term>Variance</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Answer possibilities</term><term>Communicative ability</term><term>Complaint formulation</term><term>Complete dentures</term><term>Decoy scenarios</term><term>Degreesof freedom</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dental consultant</term><term>Dental consultants</term><term>Dental implant treatment</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Dentistry</term><term>Denture</term><term>Dependent variables</term><term>Edentulous</term><term>Edentulous patients</term><term>Effect size</term><term>Fictitious patients</term><term>First question</term><term>First task</term><term>General practitioners</term><term>Health insurance</term><term>High risk perception</term><term>Hoogstraten</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant treatment</term><term>Implant treatment costs</term><term>Important characteristics</term><term>Important factor</term><term>Important factors</term><term>Important patient factors</term><term>Interaction effects</term><term>Judgment strategy</term><term>Main effects</term><term>Main effects status</term><term>Many raters</term><term>Oral hygiene</term><term>Other dentists</term><term>Patient characteristics</term><term>Patient factors</term><term>Patient satisfaction</term><term>Personal appearance</term><term>Personal appearance comprehension risk perception error</term><term>Practitioner</term><term>Prosthet</term><term>Prosthet dent</term><term>Prosthetic dentistry</term><term>Psychosocial</term><term>Psychosocial aspects</term><term>Psychosocial characteristics</term><term>Psychosocial patient characteristics</term><term>Rank numbers</term><term>Rank order</term><term>Rank order task</term><term>Risk perception</term><term>Scenario</term><term>Scenario task</term><term>Second question</term><term>Second task</term><term>Significant interaction effects</term><term>Socioeconomic status</term><term>Substantial disagreement</term><term>Suitability</term><term>Suitability rating</term><term>Summary results</term><term>Treatment expectation</term><term>Variance</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Statement of problem. Do psychosocial patient characteristics influence the decision of a dentist in recommending implant treatment?Purpose. This study assessed the importance that dental general practitioners attach to psychosocial patient characteristics when judging the suitability of these patients for dental implant treatment.Method and material. The judgment strategy of 30 Dutch dental practitioners was studied by using 2 tasks. Dentists first judged a series of written scenarios representing fictitious patients, each patient being characterized by 4 psychosocial aspects to determine the patients' suitability for implant treatment. The second task involved rank ordering 14 patient characteristics according to their importance in implant treatment decisions.Results. Dentists judged the personal appearance of the patient and, to a lesser degree, the patient's socioeconomic status to influence decisions to treat. However, these characteristics are ranked as quite unimportant in decision making, whereas motivation, oral hygiene, and level of neuroticism were the most important patient characteristics.Conclusions. The results on the 2 tasks were clearly not in agreement. There was a substantial disagreement between what dentists say to be important characteristics (rank order task) and the characteristics they actually use to judge the suitability for implant treatment (scenario task). Moreover, it appeared that agreement among the dentists is quite low, especially for the scenario task.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>elsevier</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>implant</json:string><json:string>implant treatment</json:string><json:string>scenario</json:string><json:string>personal appearance</json:string><json:string>risk perception</json:string><json:string>dental implant treatment</json:string><json:string>psychosocial</json:string><json:string>patient factors</json:string><json:string>denture</json:string><json:string>hoogstraten</json:string><json:string>prosthet dent</json:string><json:string>second task</json:string><json:string>first task</json:string><json:string>edentulous patients</json:string><json:string>prosthet</json:string><json:string>suitability</json:string><json:string>oral hygiene</json:string><json:string>socioeconomic status</json:string><json:string>first question</json:string><json:string>dentistry</json:string><json:string>variance</json:string><json:string>patient satisfaction</json:string><json:string>general practitioners</json:string><json:string>main effects</json:string><json:string>scenario task</json:string><json:string>edentulous</json:string><json:string>answer possibilities</json:string><json:string>dependent variables</json:string><json:string>treatment expectation</json:string><json:string>communicative ability</json:string><json:string>prosthetic dentistry</json:string><json:string>summary results</json:string><json:string>complete dentures</json:string><json:string>important factor</json:string><json:string>dental consultant</json:string><json:string>complaint formulation</json:string><json:string>rank order</json:string><json:string>rank numbers</json:string><json:string>psychosocial patient characteristics</json:string><json:string>practitioner</json:string><json:string>dent</json:string><json:string>psychosocial aspects</json:string><json:string>implant treatment costs</json:string><json:string>dental consultants</json:string><json:string>dental implants</json:string><json:string>main effects status</json:string><json:string>personal appearance comprehension risk perception error</json:string><json:string>degreesof freedom</json:string><json:string>decoy scenarios</json:string><json:string>rank order task</json:string><json:string>important characteristics</json:string><json:string>substantial disagreement</json:string><json:string>patient characteristics</json:string><json:string>other dentists</json:string><json:string>second question</json:string><json:string>significant interaction effects</json:string><json:string>interaction effects</json:string><json:string>fictitious patients</json:string><json:string>effect size</json:string><json:string>suitability rating</json:string><json:string>high risk perception</json:string><json:string>judgment strategy</json:string><json:string>many raters</json:string><json:string>health insurance</json:string><json:string>important factors</json:string><json:string>important patient factors</json:string><json:string>psychosocial characteristics</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>Pieter Koele PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Johan Hoogstraten PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>99800171</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/6H6-GGBB3JMF-R</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>Full-length article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Statement of problem. Do psychosocial patient characteristics influence the decision of a dentist in recommending implant treatment?Purpose. This study assessed the importance that dental general practitioners attach to psychosocial patient characteristics when judging the suitability of these patients for dental implant treatment.Method and material. The judgment strategy of 30 Dutch dental practitioners was studied by using 2 tasks. Dentists first judged a series of written scenarios representing fictitious patients, each patient being characterized by 4 psychosocial aspects to determine the patients' suitability for implant treatment. The second task involved rank ordering 14 patient characteristics according to their importance in implant treatment decisions.Results. Dentists judged the personal appearance of the patient and, to a lesser degree, the patient's socioeconomic status to influence decisions to treat. However, these characteristics are ranked as quite unimportant in decision making, whereas motivation, oral hygiene, and level of neuroticism were the most important patient characteristics.Conclusions. The results on the 2 tasks were clearly not in agreement. There was a substantial disagreement between what dentists say to be important characteristics (rank order task) and the characteristics they actually use to judge the suitability for implant treatment (scenario task). Moreover, it appeared that agreement among the dentists is quite low, especially for the scenario task.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>7.831</score><pdfWordCount>3347</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>20811</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>5</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>576 x 792 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>207</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>1513</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>0</keywordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis</title><pmid><json:string>10095220</json:string></pmid><pii><json:string>S0022-3913(99)80017-1</json:string></pii><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><serie><title>[in Dutchl]</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language></serie><host><title>The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><publicationDate>1999</publicationDate><issn><json:string>0022-3913</json:string></issn><pii><json:string>S0022-3913(99)X8001-2</json:string></pii><volume>81</volume><issue>4</issue><pages><first>476</first><last>480</last></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>1999</json:string><json:string>1989</json:string></date><geogName></geogName><orgName><json:string>Department of Social Dentistry and Dental Health Education</json:string><json:string>Dutch National Dental Insurance Schema</json:string><json:string>Department of Methodology, Faculty of Psychology</json:string><json:string>Netherlands Statement</json:string></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>Main</json:string><json:string>Johan Hoogstraten</json:string></persName><placeName><json:string>Amsterdam</json:string><json:string>Netherlands</json:string></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/6H6-GGBB3JMF-R</json:string></ark><categories><wos><json:string>1 - science</json:string><json:string>2 - dentistry, oral surgery & medicine</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>1 - health sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - clinical medicine</json:string><json:string>3 - dentistry</json:string></scienceMetrix><scopus><json:string>1 - Health Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Dentistry</json:string><json:string>3 - Oral Surgery</json:string></scopus><inist><json:string>1 - sciences appliquees, technologies et medecines</json:string><json:string>2 - sciences biologiques et medicales</json:string><json:string>3 - sciences medicales</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>1999</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1999</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1016/S0022-3913(99)80017-1</json:string></doi><id>B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><availability><p>©1999 The Editorial Council of The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</p></availability><date>1999</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Pieter</forename><surname>Koele</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">PhD</roleName><note type="biography">Associate Professor</note><note type="biography">Reprint requests to: Dr Pieter Koele Faculty of Psychology Roetersstraat 15 1018 WB Amsterdam The Netherlands</note><note type="biography">Department of Methodology, Faculty of Psychology</note><affiliation>Associate Professor</affiliation><affiliation>Reprint requests to: Dr Pieter Koele Faculty of Psychology Roetersstraat 15 1018 WB Amsterdam The Netherlands</affiliation><affiliation>Department of Methodology, Faculty of Psychology</affiliation><affiliation>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">Johan</forename><surname>Hoogstraten</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">PhD</roleName><note type="biography">Professor</note><note type="biography">Department of Social Dentistry and Dental Health Education, Academic Centre for Dentistry; and Professor, Department of Methodology, Faculty of Psychology.</note><affiliation>Professor</affiliation><affiliation>Department of Social Dentistry and Dental Health Education, Academic Centre for Dentistry; and Professor, Department of Methodology, Faculty of Psychology.</affiliation><affiliation>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</affiliation></author><idno type="istex">B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1016/S0022-3913(99)80017-1</idno><idno type="PII">S0022-3913(99)80017-1</idno><idno type="ArticleID">99800171</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j">The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">YMPR</title><idno type="pISSN">0022-3913</idno><idno type="PII">S0022-3913(99)X8001-2</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1999"></date><biblScope unit="volume">81</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="476">476</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="480">480</biblScope></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1999</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Statement of problem. Do psychosocial patient characteristics influence the decision of a dentist in recommending implant treatment?Purpose. This study assessed the importance that dental general practitioners attach to psychosocial patient characteristics when judging the suitability of these patients for dental implant treatment.Method and material. The judgment strategy of 30 Dutch dental practitioners was studied by using 2 tasks. Dentists first judged a series of written scenarios representing fictitious patients, each patient being characterized by 4 psychosocial aspects to determine the patients' suitability for implant treatment. The second task involved rank ordering 14 patient characteristics according to their importance in implant treatment decisions.Results. Dentists judged the personal appearance of the patient and, to a lesser degree, the patient's socioeconomic status to influence decisions to treat. However, these characteristics are ranked as quite unimportant in decision making, whereas motivation, oral hygiene, and level of neuroticism were the most important patient characteristics.Conclusions. The results on the 2 tasks were clearly not in agreement. There was a substantial disagreement between what dentists say to be important characteristics (rank order task) and the characteristics they actually use to judge the suitability for implant treatment (scenario task). Moreover, it appeared that agreement among the dentists is quite low, especially for the scenario task.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1999">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Elsevier doc found" wicri:toSee="Elsevier, no converted or simple article"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//ES//DTD journal article DTD version 5.0.1//EN//XML" URI="art501.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article version="5.0" xml:lang="en" docsubtype="fla"><item-info><jid>YMPR</jid><aid>99800171</aid><ce:pii>S0022-3913(99)80017-1</ce:pii><ce:doi>10.1016/S0022-3913(99)80017-1</ce:doi><ce:copyright type="unknown" year="1999">The Editorial Council of The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</ce:copyright></item-info><head><ce:title>Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis</ce:title><ce:author-group><ce:author><ce:degrees>PhD</ce:degrees><ce:given-name>Pieter</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Koele</ce:surname><ce:roles>Associate Professor</ce:roles><ce:cross-ref refid="fn1"><ce:sup>a</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref><ce:cross-ref refid="aff1"><ce:sup>1</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref><ce:cross-ref refid="aff2"><ce:sup>2</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref><ce:cross-ref refid="cor1"><ce:sup>*</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:degrees>PhD</ce:degrees><ce:given-name>Johan</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Hoogstraten</ce:surname><ce:roles>Professor</ce:roles><ce:cross-ref refid="fn2"><ce:sup>b</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref><ce:cross-ref refid="aff1"><ce:sup>1</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref><ce:cross-ref refid="aff2"><ce:sup>2</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:affiliation id="aff1"><ce:label>1</ce:label><ce:textfn>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation><ce:affiliation id="aff2"><ce:label>2</ce:label><ce:textfn>Amsterdam Academic Centre for Dentistry, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation><ce:correspondence id="cor1"><ce:label>*</ce:label><ce:text>Reprint requests to: <ce:small-caps>Dr Pieter Koele Faculty of Psychology Roetersstraat 15 1018 WB Amsterdam</ce:small-caps> The Netherlands</ce:text></ce:correspondence><ce:footnote id="fn1"><ce:label>a</ce:label><ce:note-para>Department of Methodology, Faculty of Psychology</ce:note-para></ce:footnote><ce:footnote id="fn2"><ce:label>b</ce:label><ce:note-para>Department of Social Dentistry and Dental Health Education, Academic Centre for Dentistry; and Professor, Department of Methodology, Faculty of Psychology.</ce:note-para></ce:footnote></ce:author-group><ce:abstract id="ab1" class="author" xml:lang="en"><ce:abstract-sec><ce:simple-para><ce:bold>Statement of problem</ce:bold>. Do psychosocial patient characteristics influence the decision of a dentist in recommending implant treatment?</ce:simple-para><ce:simple-para><ce:bold>Purpose</ce:bold>. This study assessed the importance that dental general practitioners attach to psychosocial patient characteristics when judging the suitability of these patients for dental implant treatment.</ce:simple-para><ce:simple-para><ce:bold>Method and material</ce:bold>. The judgment strategy of 30 Dutch dental practitioners was studied by using 2 tasks. Dentists first judged a series of written scenarios representing fictitious patients, each patient being characterized by 4 psychosocial aspects to determine the patients' suitability for implant treatment. The second task involved rank ordering 14 patient characteristics according to their importance in implant treatment decisions.</ce:simple-para><ce:simple-para><ce:bold>Results</ce:bold>. Dentists judged the personal appearance of the patient and, to a lesser degree, the patient's socioeconomic status to influence decisions to treat. However, these characteristics are ranked as quite unimportant in decision making, whereas motivation, oral hygiene, and level of neuroticism were the most important patient characteristics.</ce:simple-para><ce:simple-para><ce:bold>Conclusions</ce:bold>. The results on the 2 tasks were clearly not in agreement. There was a substantial disagreement between what dentists say to be important characteristics (rank order task) and the characteristics they actually use to judge the suitability for implant treatment (scenario task). Moreover, it appeared that agreement among the dentists is quite low, especially for the scenario task.</ce:simple-para></ce:abstract-sec></ce:abstract></head><tail><ce:bibliography><ce:section-title>References</ce:section-title><ce:bibliography-sec><ce:bib-reference id="bib1"><ce:label>1.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Cune</ce:surname><ce:given-name>MS</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>de Putter</ce:surname><ce:given-name>C</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Hoogstraten</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Characteristics of 5410 edentulous implant candidates and the treatment they receive</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Community Dent Oral Epidemiol</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>23</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1995</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>110</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>113</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib2"><ce:label>2.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Cune</ce:surname><ce:given-name>MS</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>de Putter</ce:surname><ce:given-name>C</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Hoogstraten</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Treatment outcome with implant retained overdentures. Part I—clinical findings and predictability of clinical treatment outcome</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>72</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1994</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>144</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>151</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib3"><ce:label>3.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:comment>[in Dutchl]</sb:comment><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Cune</ce:surname><ce:given-name>M</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Overdentures on oral implants</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:edited-book><sb:book-series><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>PhD thesis</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:series></sb:book-series><sb:date>1993</sb:date><sb:publisher><sb:name>Utrecht State University</sb:name><sb:location>Utrecht, The Netherlands</sb:location></sb:publisher></sb:edited-book></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib4"><ce:label>4.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:comment>Suppl</sb:comment><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Cune</ce:surname><ce:given-name>MS</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>de Putter</ce:surname><ce:given-name>C</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Hoogstraten</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>A nationwide evaluative study on implant-retained overdentures</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>25</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1997</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>S13</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>S19</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib5"><ce:label>5.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Hoogstraten</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Lamers</ce:surname><ce:given-name>LM</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Patient satisfaction after insertion of an osseointegrated implant bridge</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Oral Rehabil</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>14</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1987</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>481</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>487</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib6"><ce:label>6.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Grogono</ce:surname><ce:given-name>AL</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Lancaster</ce:surname><ce:given-name>DM</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Finger</ce:surname><ce:given-name>IM</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Dental implants: a survey of patients' attitudes</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>62</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1989</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>573</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>576</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib7"><ce:label>7.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Kiyak</ce:surname><ce:given-name>HA</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Beach</ce:surname><ce:given-name>DH</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Worthington</ce:surname><ce:given-name>P</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Taylor</ce:surname><ce:given-name>T</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Bolender</ce:surname><ce:given-name>C</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Evans</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Psychological impact of osseointegrated dental implants</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>5</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1990</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>61</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>69</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib8"><ce:label>8.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Groen</ce:surname><ce:given-name>HJ</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>A dental consultant's dilemma: decision making in dentistry</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:book><sb:date>1997</sb:date><sb:publisher><sb:name>Thesis Publishers</sb:name><sb:location>Amsterdam</sb:location></sb:publisher></sb:book></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib9"><ce:label>9.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Langer</ce:surname><ce:given-name>A</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Michman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Seifert</ce:surname><ce:given-name>I</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Factors influencing satisfaction with complete dentures in geriatric patients</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>11</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1961</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>1019</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>1031</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib10"><ce:label>10.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Smith</ce:surname><ce:given-name>M</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Measurement of personality traits and their relation to patient satisfaction with complete dentures</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>35</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1976</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>492</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>503</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib11"><ce:label>11.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Swoope</ce:surname><ce:given-name>CC</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Identification and management of emotional patients</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>27</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1972</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>434</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>440</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib12"><ce:label>12.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Van Waas</ce:surname><ce:given-name>MA</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>The influence of psychological factors on patient satisfaction with complete dentures</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>63</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1990</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>545</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>548</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib13"><ce:label>13.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Cohen</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:edited-book><sb:edition>2nd ed</sb:edition><sb:date>1988</sb:date><sb:publisher><sb:name>Erlbaum</sb:name><sb:location>Hillsdale (NJ)</sb:location></sb:publisher></sb:edited-book><sb:pages><sb:first-page>273</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>406</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib14"><ce:label>14.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Cohen</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Educ Psychol Meas</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>20</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1960</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>37</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>46</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib15"><ce:label>15.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Kendall</ce:surname><ce:given-name>MG</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Rank correlation methods</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:book><sb:date>1948</sb:date><sb:publisher><sb:name>Griffin</sb:name><sb:location>London</sb:location></sb:publisher></sb:book></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib16"><ce:label>16.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Fleiss</ce:surname><ce:given-name>JL</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Psychol Bull</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>88</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1971</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>322</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>328</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib17"><ce:label>17.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:comment>[in Dutch]</sb:comment><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Den Dekker</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Treatment planning in dental practice</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:edited-book><sb:book-series><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>PhD thesis</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:series></sb:book-series><sb:date>1990</sb:date><sb:publisher><sb:name>University of Amsterdam</sb:name><sb:location>J Amsterdam</sb:location></sb:publisher></sb:edited-book></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib18"><ce:label>18.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution langtype="en"><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Brehmer</ce:surname><ce:given-name>A</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Brehmer</ce:surname><ce:given-name>B</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>What have we learned about human judgment form thirty years of policy capturing?</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:edited-book><sb:editors><sb:editor><ce:surname>Brehmer</ce:surname><ce:given-name>B</ce:given-name></sb:editor><sb:editor><ce:surname>Joyce</ce:surname><ce:given-name>CR</ce:given-name></sb:editor></sb:editors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Human judgment: the SJT view</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:date>1988</sb:date><sb:publisher><sb:name>North-Holland</sb:name><sb:location>Amsterdam</sb:location></sb:publisher></sb:edited-book><sb:pages><sb:first-page>75</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>114</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference></ce:bibliography-sec></ce:bibliography></tail></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Pieter</namePart><namePart type="family">Koele</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">PhD</namePart><description>Associate Professor</description><affiliation>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</affiliation><description>Reprint requests to: Dr Pieter Koele Faculty of Psychology Roetersstraat 15 1018 WB Amsterdam The Netherlands</description><description>Department of Methodology, Faculty of Psychology</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Johan</namePart><namePart type="family">Hoogstraten</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">PhD</namePart><description>Professor</description><affiliation>Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands</affiliation><description>Department of Social Dentistry and Dental Health Education, Academic Centre for Dentistry; and Professor, Department of Methodology, Faculty of Psychology.</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="Full-length article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</genre><originInfo><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1999</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1999</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><abstract lang="en">Statement of problem. Do psychosocial patient characteristics influence the decision of a dentist in recommending implant treatment?Purpose. This study assessed the importance that dental general practitioners attach to psychosocial patient characteristics when judging the suitability of these patients for dental implant treatment.Method and material. The judgment strategy of 30 Dutch dental practitioners was studied by using 2 tasks. Dentists first judged a series of written scenarios representing fictitious patients, each patient being characterized by 4 psychosocial aspects to determine the patients' suitability for implant treatment. The second task involved rank ordering 14 patient characteristics according to their importance in implant treatment decisions.Results. Dentists judged the personal appearance of the patient and, to a lesser degree, the patient's socioeconomic status to influence decisions to treat. However, these characteristics are ranked as quite unimportant in decision making, whereas motivation, oral hygiene, and level of neuroticism were the most important patient characteristics.Conclusions. The results on the 2 tasks were clearly not in agreement. There was a substantial disagreement between what dentists say to be important characteristics (rank order task) and the characteristics they actually use to judge the suitability for implant treatment (scenario task). Moreover, it appeared that agreement among the dentists is quite low, especially for the scenario task.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>YMPR</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><originInfo><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">199904</dateIssued></originInfo><identifier type="ISSN">0022-3913</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0022-3913(99)X8001-2</identifier><part><date>199904</date><detail type="volume"><number>81</number><caption>vol.</caption></detail><detail type="issue"><number>4</number><caption>no.</caption></detail><extent unit="issue-pages"><start>375</start><end>498</end></extent><extent unit="pages"><start>476</start><end>480</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/6H6-GGBB3JMF-R</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1016/S0022-3913(99)80017-1</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0022-3913(99)80017-1</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">99800171</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">©1999 The Editorial Council of The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-HKKZVM7B-M">elsevier</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>The Editorial Council of The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, ©1999</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 005948 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 005948 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:B32AF17C7E0B8E8312C64A988965C97DDEC83A10
|texte= Determinants of dentists' decisions to initiate dental implant treatment: A judgment analysis
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |