ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry
Clinical Evaluation of Retention of Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Pit and Fissure Sealants in Permanent First Molars: An 18 Months Follow-up: Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Resin-based sealant effectiveness in high-caries risk children: a systematic review.BMC oral health · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of retention rates of silver nanoparticles-based fissure sealant and conventional resin-based sealant: a one-year randomized clinical trial.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2025Trial
- Evaluation of Clinical Performance of Moisture-tolerant Sealant on Pit and Fissure Caries in Two Different Setting Conditions: A Randomized Controlled Trial.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Hydrophobic or hydrophilic fissure sealants: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Dental research journal · 2026Review
- Comparison of Retention Rates of Pit and Fissure Sealants Using Flowable Composite and Moisture-tolerant Resin-based Sealant: AnInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- Dental caries, gingivitis and oral health-related quality of life in 12-year-old children.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Article
- Evaluation of sealant retention and caries prevention of 2 % chitosan-based pit and fissure sealants in permanent 1st molars - A randomised trial.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Deep pits and fissures are more prone to caries development due to their complex morphological anatomy. Preventive measures, such as pit and fissure sealants, can help in the reduction of dental caries. Conventional sealants being hydrophobic in nature, require isolation. Sealants which are hydrophilic have been introduced as an alternative where isolation is difficult to achieve. Aim: To compare and evaluate the retention and marginal integrity of hydrophilic pit and fissure sealant (Embrace WetBond) with hydrophobic pit and fissure sealant (Clinpro) in permanent first molars. Materials and methods: Sealants were applied randomly using the split-mouth design technique on 80 permanent first molars in children aged between 6 and 9 years and evaluation was done at 3, 6, 9, and 18 months. Results: The difference in retention rates between the groups was not significant using the Chi-squared test, though the WetBond group exhibited better results with 40% complete retention at the end of 18 months while in the Clinpro group, it was 37.50%. The marginal integrity in both the sealant groups was also found to be statistically insignificant. Caries incidence was found to be slightly higher in the Clinpro group. Conclusion: The clinical performance of Embrace WetBond was better when compared to Clinpro because of its moisture-tolerance capacity. Embrace Wetbond pit and fissure sealant can be the choice of material in cases where moisture control is a challenging issue. How to cite this article: Gyati O, Jain M, Sogi S,
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.