Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29364343›Full record

Trial reportJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2018

Randomized clinical trial of encapsulated and hand-mixed glass-ionomer ART restorations: one-year follow-up.

Maria Cristina Carvalho de Almendra Freitas, Ticiane Cestari Fagundes, Karin Cristina da Silva Modena, Guilherme Saintive Cardia, Maria Fidela de Lima Navarro

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04619264 (Impact of Minimally Invasive Restorative Techniques on Pregnant Women Oral Health Related Quality of Life), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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.

NCT04619264 phase2completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Impact of Minimally Invasive Restorative Techniques on Pregnant Women Oral Health Related Quality of Life: a Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorNourhan M.AlyRan2019 to 2019Enrolled162ConditionsQuality of Life, Dental CariesArmsPapacarie, Atraumatic Restorative Treatment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria Cristina Carvalho de Almendra FreitasGrupo Educacional DeVry, Faculdade DeVry FACID, Teresina, Piauí, Brasil.
Ticiane Cestari FagundesUNESP - Univ. Estadual Paulista, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba, Departamento de Odontologia Restauradora, Araçatuba, São Paulo, Brasil.
Karin Cristina da Silva ModenaUniversidade do Sagrado Coração, Centro de Ciências da Saúde, Curso de Odontologia, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.
Guilherme Saintive CardiaUniCesumar, Maringá, Paraná, Brasil.
Maria Fidela de Lima NavarroUniversidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Dentística, Endodontia e Materiais Odontológicos, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.
Centro Universitário Cesumar · BRGrupo Ibmec Educacional · BRUniversidade Brasil · BRUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BRUniversidade Sagrado Coração · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This prospective, randomized, split-mouth clinical trial evaluated the clinical performance of conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC; Riva Self-Cure, SDI), supplied in capsules or in powder/liquid kits and placed in Class I cavities in permanent molars by the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) approach. A total of 80 restorations were randomly placed in 40 patients aged 11-15 years. Each patient received one restoration with each type of GIC. The restorations were evaluated after periods of 15 days (baseline), 6 months, and 1 year, according to ART criteria. Wilcoxon matched pairs, multivariate logistic regression, and Gehan-Wilcoxon tests were used for statistical analysis. Patients were evaluated after 15 days (n=40), 6 months (n=34), and 1 year (n=29). Encapsulated GICs showed significantly superior clinical performance compared with hand-mixed GICs at baseline (p=0.017), 6 months (p=0.001), and 1 year (p=0.026). For hand-mixed GIC, a statistically significant difference was only observed over the period of baseline to 1 year (p=0.001). Encapsulated GIC presented statistically significant differences for the following periods: 6 months to 1 year (p=0.028) and baseline to 1 year (p=0.002). Encapsulated GIC presented superior cumulative survival rate than hand-mixed GIC over one year. Importantly, both GICs exhibited decreased survival over time. Encapsulated GIC promoted better ART performance, with an annual failure rate of 24%; in contrast, hand-mixed GIC demonstrated a failure rate of 42%.

Indexed as

AdolescentChildDental Atraumatic Restorative TreatmentDental Restoration FailureDental Restoration, PermanentFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGlass Ionomer CementsHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMultivariate AnalysisProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsStatistics, NonparametricTime FactorsGlass Ionomer Cements

Identifiers

PMID29364343
PMCPMC5777411
OpenAlexW2783940585

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.