Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36947344›Full record

Trial reportEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry2023

Clinical effectiveness of alkasite versus nanofilled resin composite in the restoration of occlusal carious lesions in permanent molar teeth of children: a randomized clinical trial.

H Sharma, B S Suprabha, R Shenoy, A Rao, H Kotian

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06195449 (Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Alkasite Restorative Material Versus Glass Ionomer Cement in Restoration of Primary Molars), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06195449 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Alkasite Restorative Material Versus Glass Ionomer Cement in Restoration of Primary Molars: Randomized Clinical Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorCairo UniversityRan2025 to 2026Enrolled24ConditionsTooth DecayArmsALKASITE RESTORATIVE MATERIAL, Glass Ionomer Cement
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H SharmaDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Light House Hill Road, Mangalore, Karnataka, 575001, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9299-0843
B S SuprabhaDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Light House Hill Road, Mangalore, Karnataka, 575001, India. suprabha.bhat@manipal.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7003-3121
R ShenoyDepartment of Public Health Dentistry, Manipal College of Dental Sciences Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3126-4415
A RaoDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Light House Hill Road, Mangalore, Karnataka, 575001, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6440-1274
H KotianDepartment of Community Medicine, Kasturba Medical College Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1252-507X
Manipal Academy of Higher Education · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate and compare the clinical effectiveness of alkasite with nanofilled resin composite restorations for occlusal caries lesions in permanent molar teeth of children, at one-year follow-up.

methodsIn this randomized controlled clinical trial with parallel design, 38 children aged 7-13 years with occlusal caries lesions on 59 first permanent molars were randomly allocated into two groups, Group 1: Filtek™ Z350XT (nanocomposite) and Group 2: Cention N

resultsAll restorations had either Alpha or Bravo scores at one-year follow-up. In Group 1, all restorations scored Alpha, while one restoration each (3.6%) in Group 2 scored Bravo for fracture and marginal adaptation. All restorations in both groups scored Alpha for retention, secondary caries, and post-operative sensitivity. For anatomic form, all restorations in Group 1 scored Alpha, while three (10.7%) restorations in Group 2 had Bravo scores. For marginal discolouration, three restorations in both groups scored Bravo (11.5% and 10.7%, respectively). For surface roughness, one restoration (3.8%) in Group 1 and three restorations in Group 2 (10.7%) scored Bravo. The comparative results between the two groups for all the variables in the USPHS criteria were not statistically significantly different.

conclusionsThe performances of the nanofilled composite and alkasite were clinically acceptable and comparable. Alkasite can be an alternative material for the restoration of occlusal caries lesions in permanent molars of children. CLINICAL

trial registrationThe clinical trial was registered at Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI Reg no: CTRI/2020/12/029830 Dated: 15/12/2020).

Indexed as

Dental CariesDental Restoration, PermanentChildComposite ResinsDental Marginal AdaptationFollow-Up StudiesHumansMolarNitrilesTreatment OutcomeComposite ResinsNitrilestetrachloroisophthalonitrileAlkasiteDental restorationMolarNanocompositePermanent

Identifiers

PMID36947344
PMCPMC10317863
OpenAlexW4353017180

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.