ReviewJournal of Taibah University Medical Sciences2024
Effect of light curing on the efficacy of silver diamine fluoride: A systematic review.
Review in Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study was aimed at comparing the performance of light-cured (LC) silver diamine fluoride (SDF) to non-LC SDF in dental applications, in terms of various properties. Methods: Articles published until April 2023 were retrieved from electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus and Science Direct) according to Boolean operators, and the reference lists of the included articles were manually searched. The included articles were all full-text, original studies in English that assessed the effects of LC SDF compared with SDF alone. The risk of bias in the in vitro studies on dental materials was evaluated with the modified Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist. Results: Six studies (five in vitro and one ex vivo) were included in qualitative analysis after a comprehensive manual search and electronic database search. Every study compared LC SDF versus non-LC SDF in terms of properties such as penetration depth, silver ion precipitation, dentine hardness, surface morphology and anti-bacterial characteristics. Four studies were categorised as low quality with a high risk of bias, whereas the remaining two studies were considered high quality with a low risk of bias. Conclusion: In this investigation, LC SDF, compared with non-LC SDF, was found to be an efficacious approach for enhancing SDF properties. Future high-quality studies, particularly randomised clinical trials, remain necessary to verify these findings. Clinical significance: The use of light curing with SDF can be a beneficial strategy that enhances SDF's clinical use. This review comparing various properties of LC SDF and non-LC SDF may help clinicians enhance clinical use and patient acceptance of LC SDF.
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.