Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19089275›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2006

Evaluation of glass ionomer sealants placed according to the ART approach in a community with high caries experience: 1-year follow-up.

Ana Luiza Falavinha Vieira, Nildiceli Leite Melo Zanella, Eduardo Bresciani, Terezinha de Jesus Esteves Barata, Salete Moura Bonifácio da Silva, Maria Aparecida de Andrade Moreira Machado, Maria Fidela de Lima Navarro

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Transferring ART research into education in Brazil.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB · 2009
    Article
  8. The ART approach: clinical aspects reviewed.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB · 2009
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ana Luiza Falavinha VieiraDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Paulista University -UNIP, Brazil.
Nildiceli Leite Melo Zanella
Eduardo Bresciani
Terezinha de Jesus Esteves Barata
Salete Moura Bonifácio da Silva
Maria Aparecida de Andrade Moreira Machado
Maria Fidela de Lima Navarro
Universidade Paulista · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the retention rates and effect on occlusal caries incidence of two glass ionomers used as sealants, placed according to the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) approach, in a high caries-risk community. A total of 150 newly erupted first molars of 42 schoolchildren, between 6-8 years of age were selected. The teeth were divided into two groups: experimental and control groups. In the experimental group, 76 teeth were sealed using Vidrion R-SS White (conventional GIC) and in the control group, 74 teeth were sealed using ChemFlex-Dentsply (high-viscosity conventional GIC). The sealants were applied by one operator following the "press finger technique", described in the ART-WHO manual. Two calibrated independent examiners carried out the evaluation according to the ART criteria. The intra and inter-examiner agreements were 0.84 and 0.81, respectively. Data were submitted to Mann-Whitney and Chi-square tests (p<0.05). At the 1-year follow-up, 136 (90.7%) sealants were evaluated. In the control group: 28 (41.8%) of the sealants were partially or completely retained, 38 (56.7%) completely lost, and 1 (1.5%) was replaced by another treatment. In the experimental group, 30 (43.5%) of the sealants were partially or completely retained, 38 (55.1%) were clinically scored as complete loss and 1 (1.4%) were replaced by another treatment. Seven sealants in both groups were not evaluated. Secondary caries was not observed in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the retention (p=0.49) and effect on caries incidence rates for both groups (p=0.84). The clinical performance of the glass ionomer sealants of both groups was considered satisfactory with a high success rate (98.5%). Although the sealants placed according to the ART approach showed retention rates lower than 50% after 1 year in newly erupted first molars, this approach seems to be appropriate for communities with high caries experience.

Identifiers

PMID19089275
PMCPMC4327485
OpenAlexW2023573128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.