ArticleClinical oral investigations2022
Does the use of natural products for endodontic therapy in primary teeth have sufficient evidence for clinical practice? A scoping review.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe use of natural products for pulp therapy has experienced a remarkable advancement in recent years. The aim was to provide a critical appraisal of the safety and efficacy of natural products for endodontic therapy in primary teeth and verify whether their uses in clinical practice have sufficient evidence. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo reviewers searched ten databases (Cochrane, DOSS, Embase, Google Scholar, LILACS, OpenGrey, Proquest, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) until January 2022, identifying references that evaluated the safety and efficacy of the use of natural products for endodontic therapy in primary teeth. Cohort, randomized, and non-randomized clinical trials were included.
resultsA total of 3583 references were initially identified. From the 63 studies retrieved for full-text reading, 37 fulfilled the selection criteria and were included in the qualitative analysis. The studies investigated 19 natural products for pulpotomy medicament, irrigating solution, intracanal medication, and root canal filling material. Most studies showed similar efficacy of natural products and their control groups; however, many methodological biases and concerns about the safety and efficacy of natural products were identified, questioning their clinical applicability.
conclusionsThe included studies provided insufficient evidence to support safe and effective clinical application of natural products for endodontic therapy in primary teeth. Future well-designed studies with representative samples are needed to support the use of natural products for endodontic therapy in primary teeth. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of natural products for endodontic therapy in primary teeth requires caution by clinicians, due to the insufficient available evidence.
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.