Trial reportBMC oral health2024
Comparison of the clinical performance of self-adhering flowable composite and resin-based pit and fissure sealant: a randomized clinical trial in pediatric patients.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of retention of resin-based filled and unfilled pit and fissure sealants using different isolation techniques.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Optimal nano-silica filler concentration to optimize kinetics, rheology and bonding of self-adhesive composites.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The effects of material type, salivary contamination and adhesive application on the performance of pit and fissure sealants.PloS one · 2026Article
- Comparison of post-treatment complications of conventional composites versus self-adhering composites: a review.Biomaterial investigations in dentistry · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSelf-adhering flowable composites are an innovative step in reducing the chair time of pit and fissure sealant treatment. This study aimed to compare the clinical performance of self-adhering flowable composite (SELF-ADH) and resin-based pit and fissure sealant (RBs).
methodsThis is a double-blinded, randomized, split-mouth clinical trial conducted on 80 fully erupted permanent mandibular first molars from 40 children aged 6 to 12 years. For each participant, two permanent molars were randomly treated with SELF-ADH or RB. All sealants were assessed at 3, 6, and 12-month follow-ups considering retention, marginal integrity, marginal discolouration, colour matching, surface texture, and caries recurrence. To analyse the data, logistic regression and Fisher's exact tests were used (significance level P < 0.05).
resultsAt the 12-month follow-up, the number of fully retained sealants in the SELF-ADH group was significantly higher than that in the RB group (P < 0.001). Also, The success rate of marginal integrity in the SELF-ADH group was significantly greater than the the RB group (P = 0.031), while the rate of sealant marginal discolouration was higher in the RB group (P < 0.001). The incidence of recurrent caries in teeth with partial loss of sealant in both groups (P = 0.004, P < 0.001) increased significantly over time.
conclusionThe retention and marginal integrity of the self-adhering flowable composite were significantly greater than those of the resin-based sealant. Therefore, due to the small number of work steps, flowable self-adhering composites can be used as alternatives to resin-based pit and fissure sealants.
trial registrationThis study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Kerman University of Medical Sciences with the code IR.KMU.REC.1399.556 and Iraninan Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT) code IRCT20180521039763N4, as well as full compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
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.