ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry : JCD
One-year follow-up of microscopical and clinical behavior of bioactive self-etching resin sealant.
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry : JCD. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retention rate of giomer S-PRG filler containing pit and fissure sealant applied with or without etching: a randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2024Trial
- Sample size calculation practices in original research articles of the Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics (2021-2025).Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Technological dental sealants: in vitro evaluation of material properties and antibiofilm potential.BMC oral health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The development of early carious lesions can be prevented with the use of sealants. This study aimed to evaluate the retention and sealant quality of conventional and bioactive self-etching sealants by direct (clinical) and indirect (microscopical) assessment. Materials and Methods: Sixty newly erupted mandibular second molars (International Caries Detection and Assessment System ≤2) from adolescents were selected for the split-mouth trial study. The tooth was randomized and treated with conventional Fluoroshield (FS) and BeautiSealant (BS) bioactive self-etching sealants. Molds were taken and cast with epoxy resin after treatment. Indirect and direct assessments of retention degree and sealant remnant quality were performed after baseline, 1 month, and 1 year. The Chi-square test, ordinal regression, reasons of chance, and Fleiss' kappa statistical test were employed. Results: After 1 month, greater total retention was observed for FS, but 1-year follow-up demonstrated no retention difference for FS and BS. The odds ratios showed an 86% greater chance of FS showing better marginal adaptation, after 1 month. At 1 year, the clinical assessment showed better anatomical shape and marginal adaptation scores for FS, but no microscopical difference was observed. A pour agreement between clinical and microscopical data was observed. Conclusions: The 1-year follow-up showed no significant difference in the degree of retention, and in the microscopic evaluation of the conventional sealant (FS) and the bioactive self-etching sealant (BS), but in the clinical evaluation, better marginal and anatomical adaptation scores for FS were observed.
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.