Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37306869›Full record

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

Hall technique versus conventional preformed metal crowns: can paediatric dentists tell the difference on radiographs?

S Mohanraja, M Al-Halabi, M Kowash, A Salami, A H Khamis, I Hussein

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

S MohanrajaDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, Hamdan Bin Mohammed College of Dental Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, UAE.
M Al-HalabiDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, Hamdan Bin Mohammed College of Dental Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, UAE.
M KowashDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, Hamdan Bin Mohammed College of Dental Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, UAE.
A SalamiDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, Hamdan Bin Mohammed College of Dental Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, UAE.
A H KhamisDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, Hamdan Bin Mohammed College of Dental Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, UAE.
I HusseinDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, Hamdan Bin Mohammed College of Dental Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, UAE. iyad.hussein@mbru.ac.ae.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7682-5573

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeHall technique (HT) preformed metal crowns (PMCs) are allegedly oversized compared to conventional (C) PMCs. To investigate paediatric dentists' (PDs) perception of HT-PMCs and perception/ability to identify HT or C-PMCs on bitewings radiographs.

methodsAn online cross-sectional questionnaire including ten bitewings (five of each of HT/CPMCs) was sent to PDs across the globe. A PMC type score (from '10') was calculated. T test, Pearson's and Fischer's Chi-square, and Odd Ratios (OR) (p < 0.05).

resultsA total of 476 PDs from around the world responded. Most (97%) used PMCs in their practice. Most (98.7%) knew of, and 79% used HT-PMCs. A clear opinion shift, towards supporting HT, over time was noted (OR 11.154 [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.006-20.715]. A majority (67%) thought that HT/C-PMCs were similar radiographically. Only five PMCs were identified correctly [mean score 4.9 (± 1.73)]. A minority who thought that HT/C-PMCs were dissimilar scored higher than those who thought they were similar (5.31 ± 1.22; 4.68 ± 1.9, respectively, p < 0.00001). Nobody identified all ten PMCs. HT-PMCs were 4.63 times more identifiable than C-PMCs [(OR 24.857 CI 15.059-41.028) and (OR 5.361 CI 3.089-9.304)] for HT-PMCs and CP-MCs, respectively (p < 0.0001).

conclusionsPDs identified the PMC type in half of the bitewings. They perceived no clear radiographic difference between HT-PMCs and C-PMCs, but their chance of recognizing HT-PMCs was five times higher than C-PMCs. HT-PMC support was high.

Indexed as

Dental CariesTooth, DeciduousChildCross-Sectional StudiesCrownsDentistsHumansMetalsMolarMetalsBitewingsChildrenDental cariesHall techniquePreformed metal crownsUnited Arab Emirates

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.