ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry : JCD
Clinical evaluation of winged versus wingless rubber dam clamps in single tooth isolation - A randomized clinical study.
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. 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, 2 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Retention of the rubber dam is done with metallic or nonmetallic clamps for isolation. The two types of metallic clamps most frequently used are winged and wingless. The clinical efficacy of both clamps is needed to be compared. Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare the postoperative pain and clinical efficacy of winged clamps and wingless metallic clamps in rubber dam isolation of permanent molars in class I restoration. Materials and Methods: After obtaining ethical approval and CTRI registration, a total of 60 patients with mild-to-moderate deep class I caries were included after obtaining informed consent and randomly allocated into two assigned groups: Group A - winged clamp and Group B - wingless clamp, with Statistical Analysis Used: Independent Results: Gingival trauma ( Conclusion: Both clamps showed acceptable clinical performance. Their use should be planned as per the requisite of the case and the position of the tooth.
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.