ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2013
Substantial reduction in caries from regular fluoride varnish application.
Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03720379 (Efficacy of Fluor Protector S in the Prevention of Tooth Decay in Adolescents), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Efficacy of Fluor Protector S in the Prevention of Tooth Decay in Adolescents
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prevention of Tooth Discoloration Using Fluoride Varnish Immediately After Bleaching.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
data sourcesThe Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS and BBO, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Web of Science Conference Proceedings and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched. Reference lists of identified articles were also scanned for relevant papers. Study authors were contacted for additional information. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials using or indicating blind outcome assessment that compared fluoride varnish to placebo or no treatment for at least one year were included. Risk of bias assessment was undertaken. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Study assessment and data extraction was carried out independently by at least two reviewers. The primary measure of effect was the prevented fraction, that is the difference in mean caries increments between the treatment and control groups expressed as a percentage of the mean increment in the control group. The caries increments nearest to three years were used from each included study. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed where data could be pooled. Potential sources of heterogeneity were examined in random-effects meta-regression analyses. Adverse effects information was collected from the included trials.
resultsTwenty-two trials (12,455 participants) were included. Thirteen trials were included in the permanent tooth surfaces meta-analysis, the pooled D(M)FS prevented fraction estimate comparing fluoride varnish with placebo or no treatment was 43% (95% confidence interval (CI) 30% to 57%; P < 0.0001). There was substantial heterogeneity, confirmed statistically (P < 0.0001; I(2) = 75%), however this body of evidence was assessed as of moderate quality. Ten trials contributed to the meta-analysis of primary teeth, the pooled d(e/m)fs prevented fraction estimate was 37% (95% CI 24% to 51%; P < 0.0001), there was some heterogeneity (P = 0.009; I(2) = 59%) this evidence was assessed as of moderate quality. No significant associations in either dentitions were found with baseline caries severity, background exposure to fluorides, application features such as prior prophylaxis, concentration of fluoride or frequency of application. There was little information concerning possible adverse effects or acceptability of treatment.
conclusionsThe conclusions of this updated review remain the same as when it was first published. The review suggests a substantial caries inhibiting effect of fluoride varnish in both permanent and primary teeth; however the quality of the evidence was assessed as moderate, as it included mainly high risk of bias studies, with considerable heterogeneity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24071672What 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.