ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2014
No trial evidence for restorative interventions in children and adolescents with amelogenesis imperfecta.
Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
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, and CINAHL databases were searched. Abstracts of the Conference Proceedings of the International Association for Dental Research and reference lists of identified articles were also scanned for relevant papers. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised trials where children and adolescents with AI who required restoration of teeth were allocated to different restoration techniques would have been selected. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Standard Cochrane review protocols would have been followed.
resultsNo studies met the inclusion criteria.
conclusionsWe found no randomised controlled trials of restorative treatments for children and adolescents with AI, and therefore there is no evidence as to which is the best restoration. Well defined randomised controlled trials which recruit children and adolescents and focus on the type and severity of the disorder should be undertaken to determine the best intervention for restoring teeth affected by AI.
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.