ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Application of the Extracts of
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping risk of bias criteria in systematic reviews of in vitro endodontic studies: an umbrella review.Evidence-based dentistry · 2025Pooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe main purpose of endodontic treatment is to eliminate the bacteria that are responsible for the contamination and infection of the internal surfaces in order to resolve any pulp or periapical pathology. In fact, some bacteria, such as
methodsThe scoping review was carried out strictly following the PRISMA-ScR checklist; the search was carried out on five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, EBSCO and Web of Science) and a register (Cochrane library).
resultsThe research produced a number of bibliographic sources totaling 2104. With the removal of duplicates, 670 were obtained; potentially eligible articles amounted to 23, of which only seven in vitro studies (four microbiological studies), five clinical studies (three randomized trials) and a case report were included.
conclusionsFrom the data in the literature, it can be stated that the active ingredients present in
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.