Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30003427›Full record

SynthesisLasers in medical science2019

Er:YAG laser application in caries removal and cavity preparation in children: a meta-analysis.

Ting Li, Xiaolin Zhang, Hong Shi, Zhe Ma, Bingjian Lv, Meng Xie

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Ting LiDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry Stomatological Hospital, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Xiaolin ZhangDepartment of Epidemiology and Statistics, School of Public Health, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Hong ShiDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry Stomatological Hospital, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China. shihong_hb@163.com.
Zhe MaDepartment of Oral medical Dentistry Stomatological Hospital, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Bingjian LvDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry Stomatological Hospital, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Meng XieDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry Stomatological Hospital, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Hebei Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically evaluate the applications of Er:YAG lasers for the removal of caries and cavity preparation in children. The meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and was conducted with data extracted from seven relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 1997 to July 2017. The data heterogeneity of each study was assessed by a Q test. We used the heterogeneity results to calculate the standard mean difference (SMD) or relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) using STATA version 10.0. The publication bias was evaluated using Begger's test. There were seven randomized controlled trials included in this study. The analysis results indicate that compared to the conventional mechanical method, more time was needed for Er:YAG laser treatment (SMD 1.945, 95%CI 0.942 to 2.948). However, the pain reported by patients was reduced with Er:YAG laser treatment (SMD - 1.013, 95%CI - 1.892 to - 0.196). There were no significant differences between the groups in the complete retention rate (RR 1.021, 95%CI 0.963 to 1.114), the marginal discoloration (RR 1.638, 95% CI 0.240 to 11.986) and the marginal adaptation (RR 1.480, 95%CI 0.257 to 8.515). In conclusion, our data indicate that the time required for Er:YAG laser treatment was longer than that for the conventional mechanical method, but there was less pain associated with the Er:YAG laser treatment. There were no significant differences in the complete retention rate, marginal discoloration, and marginal adaptation between the two groups.

Indexed as

Dental Cavity PreparationCase-Control StudiesChildDental CariesHumansLasers, Solid-StatePainPublication BiasRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTime FactorsChildrenConventional mechanical methodDental cariesEr:YAG laserMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID30003427
OpenAlexW2819121276

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.