Gauri Kalra, Apurva Mishra, Kusum Bharti, Vijay Prakash Mathur
Authoritative parenting was associated with more positive dental behaviour than permissive or authoritarian parenting. However, the cross-sectional design, residual confounding, heterogeneity, wide prediction intervals and very low-certainty evidence preclude causal interpretation. Evidence for DC was mixed and did not support a pooled estimate.
BACKGROUND: Parental influence plays a critical role in shaping a child's behaviour during dental visits, particularly when parents themselves have experienced negative dental encounters. This systematic review investigated the association between parenting styles (PSs), children's behaviour in dental settings and dental caries (DC) experience.
METHODS: This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2020) and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024550441). Electronic databases and grey-literature sources were searched for studies published from January 2014 to December 2025. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool for analytical cross-sectional studies. Extractable dental-behaviour data were pooled using generic inverse-variance random-effects models with restricted maximum-likelihood estimation and modified Hartung-Knapp confidence intervals. DC outcomes were synthesised narratively because of clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.
RESULTS: Seventeen cross-sectional studies met the eligibility criteria. Thirteen studies (76.5%) included only children aged up to 6 years, and the Parenting Styles and Dimensions Questionnaire (PSDQ) was used in 13 studies (76.5%). Twelve studies assessed dental behaviour or cooperation and 12 assessed DC; seven evaluated both outcomes. In the primary meta-analysis, authoritative parenting was associated with higher odds of positive dental behaviour than permissive parenting (OR 4.77, 95% CI 1.10-20.76; I 2 = 88.1%) and authoritarian parenting (OR 7.95, 95% CI 2.32-27.29; I 2 = 54.1%). The 95% prediction intervals for both comparisons crossed the null. No clear difference was found between permissive and authoritarian parenting (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.36-2.10; I 2 = 19.2%). DC findings were inconsistent. Certainty of evidence was very low for all three behavioural comparisons.
CONCLUSION: Authoritative parenting was associated with more positive dental behaviour than permissive or authoritarian parenting. However, the cross-sectional design, residual confounding, heterogeneity, wide prediction intervals and very low-certainty evidence preclude causal interpretation. Evidence for DC was mixed and did not support a pooled estimate.