ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021
Vital and Nonvital Pulp Therapy in Primary Dentition: An Umbrella Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of hand and rotary instrumentations during biomechanical preparation in primary teeth: an umbrella review with evidence stratification.Evidence-based dentistry · 2025Pooled it
- A Prospective, Blinded Randomized, Active-controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Success of Double Antibiotic Paste in Pulpally Infected Primary Molars.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- An approach of preserving a mandibular primary second molar by a hemisection procedure: A case report with 36-month follow up.Heliyon · 2022Article
- Clinical Effectiveness of Restorative Materials for the Restoration of Carious Primary Teeth: An Umbrella Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dental caries is the most common non-communicable disease in children with significant aesthetic, functional, and quality of life deterioration. Depending on the depth, two approaches may be considered in primary dentition: vital pulp therapy (VPT) or non-vital therapy (NPT). This umbrella review aimed to critically assess the available systematic reviews (SRs) on VPT and NPT. An electronic database search was conducted (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and LILACS) until June 2021. The Risk of Bias (RoB) of SRs was analyzed using the Measurement Tool to Assess SRs criteria 2 (AMSTAR2). From 272 entries, 33 SRs were included. Regarding the methodological quality, three studies were critically low, nine low, seventeen moderate, and six were rated as high quality. The quality of evidence produced by the available SRs was moderate. Future high standard SRs and well-designed clinical trials are warranted to better elucidate the clinical protocols and outcomes of VPT and NPT.
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.