Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38488955›Full record

SynthesisEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry2024

Clinical effectiveness of pit and fissure sealants in primary and permanent teeth of children and adolescents: an umbrella review.

S Amend, C Boutsiouki, J Winter, D Kloukos, R Frankenberger, N Krämer

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

S AmendDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, Medical Centre for Dentistry, University Medical Centre Giessen and Marburg (Campus Giessen), Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Schlangenzahl 14, 35392, Giessen, Germany. Stefanie.Amend@dentist.med.uni-giessen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0946-0367
C BoutsioukiDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, Medical Centre for Dentistry, University Medical Centre Giessen and Marburg (Campus Giessen), Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Schlangenzahl 14, 35392, Giessen, Germany.
J WinterDepartment of Operative Dentistry, Endodontics and Paediatric Dentistry, Medical Centre for Dentistry, University Medical Centre Giessen and Marburg (Campus Marburg), Philipps-University Marburg, Georg-Voigt-Str. 3, 35039, Marburg, Germany.
D KloukosDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, University of Bern, Freiburgstr. 7, 3008, Bern, Switzerland.
R FrankenbergerDepartment of Operative Dentistry, Endodontics and Paediatric Dentistry, Medical Centre for Dentistry, University Medical Centre Giessen and Marburg (Campus Marburg), Philipps-University Marburg, Georg-Voigt-Str. 3, 35039, Marburg, Germany.
N KrämerDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry, Medical Centre for Dentistry, University Medical Centre Giessen and Marburg (Campus Giessen), Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Schlangenzahl 14, 35392, Giessen, Germany.
Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen · DEPhilipps University of Marburg · DEUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis umbrella review aimed to critically appraise the evidence published in systematic reviews (SRs) on the clinical effectiveness of sealants compared with each other/the non-use in primary/permanent teeth of children and adolescents with at least 12-month follow-up.

methodsA systematic literature search on 4 electronic databases was conducted up to January 18th, 2023. Following handsearching, two review authors independently screened retrieved articles, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias (RoB) using the risk of bias in systematic reviews (ROBIS) tool. Based on a citation matrix, the overlap was interpreted by the corrected covered area (CCA).

resultsOf 239 retrieved records, 7 SRs met the eligibility criteria with a moderate overlap among them (CCA = 7.4%). For primary molars, in 1120 1.5- to 8-year-old children, data on the clinical effectiveness of sealants were inconclusive. For permanent molars, 3 SRs found a significant caries risk reduction for sealants versus non-use (≤ 36-month follow-up). There was insufficient evidence to proof superiority of sealants over fluoride varnish for caries prevention (3 SRs), and to rank sealant materials according to the best clinical effectiveness in permanent molars. One study was rated at low and 6 at high RoB, which did not allow for a valid quantitative synthesis.

conclusionConsidering the limitations of this umbrella review, sealants are more effective for caries prevention in children's permanent molars compared to no treatment. Future well-implemented RCTs are needed to draw reliable conclusions on the clinical effectiveness of sealants in primary and permanent teeth of children and adolescents.

Indexed as

Dental CariesDentition, PermanentPit and Fissure SealantsTooth, DeciduousAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolHumansTreatment OutcomePit and Fissure SealantsAdolescentsChildrenClinical effectivenessPermanent teethPit and fissure sealantsPrimary teethUmbrella review

Identifiers

PMID38488955
PMCPMC11233332
OpenAlexW4392847885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.