ArticleDentistry journal2021
36 Months' Clinical Performance of Primary Incisors Restorations Depending on the Type of Restorative Technique Used: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Dentistry journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aesthetic preformed paediatric crowns in primary incisors: a bibliometric study and critical analysis.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026Review
- Resin selection patterns and factors for primary anterior strip crown restorations: A cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDepending on the stage of the disease and the child's age, different types of interventions can be used to treat early childhood caries. As a result, there is not enough clinical evidence to show that one kind of restoration is better than another. The objective of this longitudinal study was to compare the results of 36 months of clinical performance of primary incisors restorations using an incremental layering technique with the ceram.x
methods80 patients (females 42/52.5%) were included in the study. A total of 160 restorations were performed. Restorations were evaluated at baseline and at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months, according to modified Ryge criteria.
conclusionRestorations with both techniques were clinically highly successful and showed similar clinical performance at postoperatively regardless of the presence of biological factors of caries risk.
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.