Summary of findings 2. Motivational interview plus oral health education compared with oral health education for people with serious mental illness.
| Motivational interview plus oral health education compared to oral health education for people with serious mental illness | ||||||
| Patient or population: People with serious mental illness Settings: Intervention: Motivational interview plus oral health education Comparison: Oral health education | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| Oral health education | Motivational interview + oral health education | |||||
| Oral health: Not having seen a dentist in the past year | No study reported useable data | |||||
| Oral health: Not brushing teeth twice a day | ||||||
| Quality of life: Chronic pain | ||||||
| Adverse events: Clinically important specific adverse events | ||||||
| Service use: Emergency medical/dental treatment | ||||||
| Leaving the study early | 33 per 10001 | 36 per 1000 (33 to 38) | RR 3.00 (0.33 to 27.23) | 60 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate2 | |
| Dental state: No clinically important change in plaque index Average score (modified Quigley‐Hein Plaque Index) | The mean dental state: no clinically important change in plaque index in the intervention groups was 0.6 lower (1.02 to 0.18 lower) | 56 (1 study) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low3,4 | |||
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. | ||||||
1Approximately 3% control risk taken from the included study. 2Risk of bias: rated 'serious' ‐ important assumptions in the denominator data. 3Risk of bias: rated 'very serious' ‐ supported by 'interested' industry, reporting problematic, unclear if standard error reported as standard deviation. 4Indirectness: rated 'serious' ‐ not binary outcome, clinical meaning of average scores not clear.