ArticleDental research journal
Sealants revisited: An efficacy battle between the two major types of sealants - A randomized controlled clinical trial.
Article in Dental research journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Assessment of Compomers and Ormocers as Pit and Fissure Sealants in Permanent Molars among Children Aged 7-9 Years.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2024Article
- A concise review of dental sealants in caries management.Frontiers in oral health · 2023Review
- Article
- Performance of fissure sealants on fully erupted permanent molars with incipient carious lesions: A glass-ionomer-based versus a resin-based sealant.Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study is comparing the retention and caries preventive effect of the glass-ionomer fissure sealant and resin-based fissure sealant. MATERIALS AND
methodsA randomized-controlled split-mouth study was conducted to compare the retention and the caries preventive effect of light-cured resin-based sealant (3M ESPE) and glass ionomer sealant (Fuji VII). The sealants were applied to either the right or the left lower mandibular molars (7-9 yrs of age) in 120 school children, based on the randomization process. They were recalled for assessment of clinical retention at intervals of 3, 6, and 12 months. The caries-preventive effect between the two materials was tested statistically by the McNemar's test for matched pairs, and the differences observed with regard to the retention of the materials was tested by Chi-square tests. The level of significance was set to be at
resultsAt the end of 12
conclusionThe glass ionomer sealant was less retentive when compared to resin sealants. The caries incidence between the glass ionomer and resin-based sealants was not statistically significant.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30745917PMC6340219What 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.