ArticleJournal of dentistry (Tehran, Iran)2017
One-Year Clinical Success of Embrace Hydrophilic and Helioseal-F Hydrophobic Sealants in Permanent First Molars: A Clinical Trial.
Article in Journal of dentistry (Tehran, Iran), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Clinical Performance of Moisture-tolerant Sealant on Pit and Fissure Caries in Two Different Setting Conditions: A Randomized Controlled Trial.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Clinical Evaluation of an Organoselenium-Enhanced Sealant and a Moisture-tolerant Sealant: A 16-month Study.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026Article
- Clinical Evaluation of Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Resin-Based Sealants in Uncooperative Children: A 24-Month Randomized Controlled Trial.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Hydrophobic or hydrophilic fissure sealants: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Dental research journal · 2026Review
- Comparison of Retention Rates of Pit and Fissure Sealants Using Flowable Composite and Moisture-tolerant Resin-based Sealant: AnInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- A concise review of dental sealants in caries management.Frontiers in oral health · 2023Review
- Comparative Assessment of Retention and Caries Protective Effectiveness of a Hydrophilic and a Conventional Sealant-A Clinical Trial.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The effect of the Er: YAG laser on the clinical success of hydrophilic fissure sealant: a randomized clinical trial.European oral research · 2020Article
- Dawn of a New Age Fissure Sealant? A Study Evaluating the Clinical Performance of Embrace WetBond and ART Sealants: Results from a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.European journal of dentistry · 2019Article
- Clinical Evaluation of Retention of Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Pit and Fissure Sealants in Permanent First Molars: An 18 Months Follow-up: Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistryArticle
- Moisture Tolerant Pit and Fissure Sealant: A Literature Review.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study sought to compare the one-year clinical success of a hydrophilic and a hydrophobic fissure sealant in permanent first molars. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis split-mouth clinical trial was conducted on 23 six to nine year olds who had four fully erupted sound first molars. Helioseal-F and Embrace sealants were randomly applied on the first molars, and follow-ups were scheduled at three, six and 12 months to examine the teeth according to USPHS criteria (retention, marginal adaptation, color match, surface smoothness and caries recurrence). The Wilcoxon signed rank test, the Friedman test and the Mann Whitney test were applied for statistical analyses (P<0.05).
resultsNo significant differences were noted between Embrace and Helioseal-F in retention, smoothness of surface, marginal adaptation, color match or caries at three, six or 12 months (all P>0.05). In addition, the retention of sealants between the maxilla and mandible was not significantly different (P>0.05). Friedman test revealed no significant difference in any of the five parameters at different time points in any sealant group (P>0.05).
conclusionsEmbrace hydrophilic and Helioseal-F hydrophobic sealants have the same one-year clinical success rate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29104600PMC5662514What 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.