Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24772264›Full record

ArticleORAL & implantology2013

Sealants in dentistry: a systematic review of the literature.

R Condò, A Cioffi, A Riccio, M Totino, S G Condò, L Cerroni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ORAL & implantology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Clinical effectiveness of pit and fissure sealants in primary and permanent teeth of children and adolescents: an umbrella review.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Bioactive glass ceramic can improve the bond strength of sealant/enamel?European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2019
    Article
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

R CondòDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine - University of Rome "Tor Vergata"
A CioffiDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine - University of Rome "Tor Vergata"
A RiccioDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine - University of Rome "Tor Vergata"
M TotinoDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine - University of Rome "Tor Vergata"
S G CondòDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine - University of Rome "Tor Vergata"
L CerroniDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine - University of Rome "Tor Vergata"
University of Rome Tor Vergata · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThe occlusal surface is the most affected area by dental caries and the sealing of the pits and of the fissures has been found, in time, the preventive method most effective trying to counteract the onset. Currently, the WHO considers it as a primary preventive measure, in other words one of the most effective and least invasive available to ensure the complete protection and the total preservation of the occlusal carious by the phenomenon. PURPOSE: THE AIM OF THIS WORK HAS BEEN TO PERFORM A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON CLINICAL TRIALS OF DIFFERENT SEALING MATERIALS, IN ORDER TO: compare their individual characteristics, highlight the reliability and the long-term efficacy and identify the most significant variables, both technological and clinics, in order to declare whether or not the success of this method prior. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe research has been carried out in the MEDLINE database by choosing keywords as "sealants" and "follow up". Only studies published in the last thirteen years have been considered and have been evaluated only types of scientific articles that fall within the definition of Anglo-Saxon "Clinical Trial" and "Controlled Clinical Trial", excluding all experimental works in vitro, case-reports, meta-analyzes and literature reviews. Have been also considered only scientific papers on patients between the ages of 0 and 18 years.

resultsOut of 29 studies, evaluating a total of 2900 individuals (aged between 2.5 and 17 years), 7411 seals made by using resin-based sealants (RB Sealants), modified glass ionomer sealants (RMGI) and compomer sealants have been analyzed. The best retention capacity of the material in time has been obtained from the use of RB Sealants compared to RMGI, demonstrating retention values much lower with partial loss of material at a distance of one year from the clinic. The compomers demonstrate retention values intermediates. The incidence of caries in a year is negligible for all sealants application.

conclusionsIn terms of retention, resin-based sealants (RB Sealants) are the materials that give more guarantees of success at 12 months, while in the same period there haven't been significant differences in caries prevention of disease among the various classes sealing materials analyzed.

Indexed as

caries preventionsealantssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID24772264
PMCPMC3982302
OpenAlexW2106133470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.