Trial reportJournal of dental research2012
Dental composites and amalgam and physical development in children.
Trial report in Journal of dental research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00065988 (Health Effects of Dental Amalgams in Children), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Health Effects of Dental Amalgams in Children
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toxicity of resin-matrix composites in a dental clinical setting.Odontology · 2025Pooled it
- Direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings for permanent posterior teeth.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Dental sealants and composite restorations and longitudinal changes in immune function markers in children.International journal of paediatric dentistry · 2014Trial
- Dental sealants and flowable composite restorations and psychosocial, neuropsychological, and physical development in children.Pediatric dentistryTrial
- Awareness of Amalgam and Safe Removal Techniques Among Dentists in Turkey: A Cross-Sectional Study.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2025Article
- Is Dental Amalgam a Higher Risk Factor rather than Resin-Based Restorations for Systemic Conditions? A Systematic Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Endocrine-disrupting chemicals: implications for human health.The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology · 2020Review
- Bisphenol A in human saliva and urine before and after treatment with dental polymer-based restorative materials.European journal of oral sciences · 2019Article
- Review
- Amalgam tattoo versus melanocytic neoplasm - Differential diagnosis of dark pigmented oral mucosa lesions using infrared spectroscopy.PloS one · 2018Article
- Presence and leaching of bisphenol a (BPA) from dental materials.Acta biomaterialia odontologica Scandinavica · 2018Article
- Changes in urinary bisphenol A concentrations associated with placement of dental composite restorations in children and adolescents.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2016Article
- In Vitro Description of Macroscopic Changes of Dental Amalgam Discs Subject to High Temperatures to Forensic Purposes.The Journal of forensic odonto-stomatology · 2015Observational
- Early-life bisphenol a exposure and child body mass index: a prospective cohort study.Environmental health perspectives · 2014Article
- Dental sealants and restorations and urinary bisphenol A concentrations in children in the 2003-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Resin-based composite dental restoration materials may release bisphenol-A, an endocrine-disrupting chemical. Using secondary analysis of a randomized clinical safety trial of amalgam vs. composites, we tested the hypothesis that dental restoration materials affect children's growth. Children (N = 218 boys, N = 256 girls) aged 6 to 10 yrs at baseline with ≥ 2 decayed posterior teeth were randomized to amalgam or composites (bisphenol-A-diglycidyl-dimethacrylate composite for permanent teeth, urethane-dimethacrylate compomer for primary teeth) for treatment of posterior caries throughout follow-up. Primary outcomes for this analysis were 5-year changes in BMI-for-age z-scores, body fat percentage (BF%), and height velocity; exploratory analyses (n = 113) examined age at menarche. Results showed no significant differences between treatment assignment and changes in physical development in boys [(composites vs. amalgam) BF%, 4.9 vs. 5.7, p = 0.49; (BMI-z-score) 0.13 vs. 0.25, p = 0.36] or girls (8.8 vs. 7.7, p = 0.95; 0.36 vs. 0.21, p = 0.49). Children with more treatment on primary teeth had greater increases in BF% regardless of material type. Girls assigned to composites had lower risk of menarche during follow-up (hazard ratio = 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.95). Overall, there were no significant differences in physical development over 5 years in children treated with composites or amalgam. Additional studies examining these restoration materials in relation to age at menarche are warranted (clinicaltrials.gov number NCT00065988).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.