ArticleCureus2023
COVID-19 Reflections on Restorative Treatments of Permanent First Molars.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimIt is important to provide appropriate dental care for newly erupted permanent first molars (PFMs) since they are susceptible to caries. As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to significant changes in the way dental services are provided to patients, the purpose of this study is to examine the procedure records assigned to PFMs of 6-15 year-olds during the pandemic and analyze the restorative material preferences of the residents of public dental hospitals. MATERIALS AND
methodsProcedure records of patients aged between 6-15 years were extracted from the Public Oral and Dental Health Center, Bursa, Türkiye. All teeth groups except PFMs were excluded, while extracted, survived (restorative/endodontic/prosthetic procedures), and prevented (fissure sealant application) PFMs were analyzed retrospectively. Furthermore, restorative material preferences were analyzed by arch location, cavity surfaces, and dentition types.
resultsStrong positive correlation was seen between age and PFM extraction (r=0.973; p<0.001) and age and PFM restorative treatments (r= 0.966; p<0.001); a negative correlation was detected between age and fissure sealants (r= -0.984; p<0,001) performed on PFMs of 8-15-year-olds. Amalgam was most often preferred as the restorative material (p<0.05).
conclusionThe distribution of treatments and dental restorations can vary based on many factors, and the pandemic conditions may have changed treatment preferences to favor preventive dentistry. The excess of multi-surface restorations may be related to the delay of treatment applications during COVID-19.
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.