Clinical Decision-MakingGID-CDMNCT07675564
Impact of Gender Identity on Dentists' Clinical Decision-Making
A study testing Clinical Case Scenario in people with Clinical Decision-Making and Gender Identity, run by Universidade Federal de Santa Maria at 1 site in Brazil.
Trial summary
This randomized study evaluated whether patient gender identity influences dentists' clinical decision-making. Dentists in southern Brazil were randomly assigned to receive one of two versions of the same hypothetical dental clinical case. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Clinical Decision-Making, Gender Identity, Transgender Persons
- What is being tested?
- Clinical Case Scenario
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 204 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBrazil
- Study dates
- 12 Sep 2023to 9 Apr 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Professionally active dentists.
- Able and willing to provide informed consent.
- Practicing dentistry during the data collection period.
Who cannot join
- Dentists not actively practicing during the data collection period.
- Dentists who participated in the pilot study.
- Individuals who declined participation or did not provide informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Brazil1 site
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
Santa Maria, Rio Grande do Sul, 97501-650
About this study
Official title: Does Gender Identity Influence Dentists' Clinical Decision-Making? A Randomized Study
This randomized study evaluated whether patient gender identity influences dentists' clinical decision-making. Dentists in southern Brazil were randomly assigned to receive one of two versions of the same hypothetical dental clinical case. The cases were identical except for the patient's gender identity, which was presented as either a transgender woman or a cisgender woman.
Participants selected treatment options for anterior and posterior teeth and completed questionnaires regarding professional characteristics and knowledge about transgender health. The primary objective was to determine whether patient gender identity influenced treatment recommendations. Differences in clinical decision-making between groups were analyzed using regression models.
Read the detailed description
Clinical decision-making in dentistry may be influenced by factors beyond clinical findings, including professional characteristics, personal beliefs, and social perceptions. While disparities related to race and socioeconomic status have been documented in oral health care, little is known about the influence of patient gender identity on dentists' treatment decisions.
This randomized parallel-group study was conducted among practicing dentists in southern Brazil between September 2023 and April 2024. Participants were randomly assigned to evaluate one of two versions of a hypothetical dental clinical case. The clinical information, photographs, complaints, and treatment scenarios were identical in both versions, differing only in the patient's gender identity. In one version, the patient was identified as a transgender woman, while in the other the patient was identified as a cisgender woman.
Participants selected treatment options for an anterior tooth and a posterior tooth and subsequently completed questionnaires addressing sociodemographic characteristics, professional profile, previous experience with transgender patients, and training related to transgender health. The primary outcome was the treatment recommendation provided by the dentist. Recommendations were categorized into conservative and invasive treatment approaches for analysis.
The study aimed to determine whether patient gender identity influences dentists' clinical decision-making and to identify professional characteristics associated with treatment recommendations.
- Being tested
- Clinical Case Scenario
- Keywords
- Transgender Persons, Gender Identity, Clinical Decision-Making.
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Clinical Case ScenarioBehavioural
Participants were randomly assigned to evaluate one of two versions of a hypothetical dental clinical case. The cases contained identical clinical information, photographs, complaints, and treatment options, differing only in the patient's gender identity. One version described a transgender woman and the other described a cisgender woman. Participants selected treatment recommendations based on the assigned scenario.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Transgender Woman Case | Experimental | Participants evaluated a hypothetical dental clinical case in which the patient was identified as a transgender woman. Clinical information, complaints, and treatment options were identical to the comparison arm. Receives: Behavioral: Clinical Case Scenario |
| Cisgender Woman Case | Experimental | Participants evaluated a hypothetical dental clinical case in which the patient was identified as a cisgender woman. Clinical information, complaints, and treatment options were identical to the comparison arm. Receives: Behavioral: Clinical Case Scenario |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Treatment Recommendation for Posterior Tooth
Treatment recommendation for tooth 26 based on the assigned clinical case. Available options included endodontic treatment followed by direct composite restoration, endodontic treatment followed by indirect ceramic restoration, or extraction.
Measured: Immediately after questionnaire completion
Treatment Recommendation for Anterior Tooth
Treatment recommendation for tooth 11 based on the assigned clinical case. Available options included no intervention, repair of the composite restoration, replacement of the restoration, direct composite veneer, or indirect ceramic veneer.
Measured: Immediately after questionnaire completion
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted30 Jun 2026
- Study start12 Sep 2023
- Primary completion9 Apr 2024
- Study completion9 Apr 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Clinical Decision-MakingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to evaluate one of two versions of the same hypothetical dental clinical case. The cases were identical regarding clinical findings, photographs, complaints, and treatment alternatives, differing only in the patient's gender identity. One group evaluated a case involving a transgender woman, while the other evaluated a case involving a cisgender woman. Treatment recommendations were compared between groups to assess whether patient gender identity influenced clinical decision-making.
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 204 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, FELIPE SOMAVILLA BINOTTO, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07675564
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CAEE 55339221.3.0000.5346
- Acronym
- GID-CDM
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 22 Jun 2026
- Last updated
- 30 Jun 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Individual participant data will not be made publicly available because the study collected information from individual professionals under conditions of confidentiality and anonymity. Data sharing may be restricted by ethical and institutional requirements.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 Jun 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Does Gender Identity Influence Dentists' Clinical Decision-Making? A Randomized Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07675564
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- GID-CDM / CAEE 55339221.3.0000.5346
- Keywords
- Transgender Persons, Gender Identity, Clinical Decision-Making.
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 204 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Universidade Federal de Santa MariaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 12 Sep 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 9 Apr 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 9 Apr 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 30 Jun 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This randomized study evaluated whether patient gender identity influences dentists' clinical decision-making. Dentists in southern Brazil were randomly assigned to receive one of two versions of the same hypothetical dental clinical case. The cases were identical except for the patient's gender identity, which was presented as either a transgender woman or a cisgender woman.
Participants selected treatment options for anterior and posterior teeth and completed questionnaires regarding professional characteristics and knowledge about transgender health. The primary objective was to determine whether patient gender identity influenced treatment recommendations. Differences in clinical decision-making between groups were analyzed using regression models.
Detailed description
Clinical decision-making in dentistry may be influenced by factors beyond clinical findings, including professional characteristics, personal beliefs, and social perceptions. While disparities related to race and socioeconomic status have been documented in oral health care, little is known about the influence of patient gender identity on dentists' treatment decisions.
This randomized parallel-group study was conducted among practicing dentists in southern Brazil between September 2023 and April 2024. Participants were randomly assigned to evaluate one of two versions of a hypothetical dental clinical case. The clinical information, photographs, complaints, and treatment scenarios were identical in both versions, differing only in the patient's gender identity. In one version, the patient was identified as a transgender woman, while in the other the patient was identified as a cisgender woman.
Participants selected treatment options for an anterior tooth and a posterior tooth and subsequently completed questionnaires addressing sociodemographic characteristics, professional profile, previous experience with transgender patients, and training related to transgender health. The primary outcome was the treatment recommendation provided by the dentist. Recommendations were categorized into conservative and invasive treatment approaches for analysis.
The study aimed to determine whether patient gender identity influences dentists' clinical decision-making and to identify professional characteristics associated with treatment recommendations.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to evaluate one of two versions of the same hypothetical dental clinical case. The cases were identical regarding clinical findings, photographs, complaints, and treatment alternatives, differing only in the patient's gender identity. One group evaluated a case involving a transgender woman, while the other evaluated a case involving a cisgender woman. Treatment recommendations were compared between groups to assess whether patient gender identity influenced clinical decision-making.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Transgender Woman Case | Experimental | Behavioral: Clinical Case ScenarioParticipants evaluated a hypothetical dental clinical case in which the patient was identified as a transgender woman. Clinical information, complaints, and treatment options were identical to the comparison arm. |
| Cisgender Woman Case | Experimental | Behavioral: Clinical Case ScenarioParticipants evaluated a hypothetical dental clinical case in which the patient was identified as a cisgender woman. Clinical information, complaints, and treatment options were identical to the comparison arm. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Professionally active dentists.
- Able and willing to provide informed consent.
- Practicing dentistry during the data collection period.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Dentists not actively practicing during the data collection period.
- Dentists who participated in the pilot study.
- Individuals who declined participation or did not provide informed consent.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical Case ScenarioParticipants were randomly assigned to evaluate one of two versions of a hypothetical dental clinical case. The cases contained identical clinical information, photographs, complaints, and treatment options, differing only in the patient's gender identity. One version described a transgender woman and the other described a cisgender woman. Participants selected treatment recommendations based on the assigned scenario. | Behavioural | Cisgender Woman Case, Transgender Woman Case |
Primary outcome
Treatment Recommendation for Posterior Tooth
Time frame: Immediately after questionnaire completion
Treatment recommendation for tooth 26 based on the assigned clinical case. Available options included endodontic treatment followed by direct composite restoration, endodontic treatment followed by indirect ceramic restoration, or extraction.
Treatment Recommendation for Anterior Tooth
Time frame: Immediately after questionnaire completion
Treatment recommendation for tooth 11 based on the assigned clinical case. Available options included no intervention, repair of the composite restoration, replacement of the restoration, direct composite veneer, or indirect ceramic veneer.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 30 Jun 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Individual participant data will not be made publicly available because the study collected information from individual professionals under conditions of confidentiality and anonymity. Data sharing may be restricted by ethical and institutional requirements.
Related trials for Clinical Decision-Making
RecruitingObservational study
The Decision To Enroll In Therapeutic Clinical Trials In A Pediatric Cancer Clinical Network
Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
Recruiting
GenAI-Assisted Rheumatoid Arthritis Bone Erosion Risk Assessment and DMARD Selection
Rheumatoid Arthritis
RecruitingPhase 2
Circulating Tumor DNA Methylation-Guided Adjuvant Therapy Decision-Making in Patients With Resectable Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases After Resection
Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases (CRLM), ctDNA
RecruitingObservational study
A Study for the PanCystPro Assay in the Management of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions
Pancreatic Cystic Lesions
Not yet recruitingObservational study
PAtient Similarity for Decision-Making in Prevention of Cardiovascular Toxicity (PACT): A Feasibility Study
Heart Failure, Coronary Artery Disease
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Clinical Case Scenario in people with Clinical Decision-Making and Gender Identity, run by Universidade Federal de Santa Maria at 1 site in Brazil.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 30 Jun 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Brazil. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Treatment Recommendation for Posterior Tooth (time frame: Immediately after questionnaire completion). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 30 Jun 2026.