Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39184894›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry2024

Clinical Effectiveness of High-viscosity Glass Ionomer Cement and Composite Resin as a Restorative Material in Primary Teeth: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials.

Karthika Krishnakumar, Ritesh Kalaskar, Ashita Kalaskar, Shivani Bhadule, Suyash Joshi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Karthika KrishnakumarDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Government Dental College & Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6011-7337
Ritesh KalaskarDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Government Dental College & Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7403-3364
Ashita KalaskarDepartment of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Government Dental College & Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
Shivani BhaduleDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Government Dental College & Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
Suyash JoshiDepartment of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Government Dental College & Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1976-2676

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: This systematic review was designed to compare the clinical effectiveness of high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (HVGIC) restorations to direct composite resin (CR) restorations in single- or multisurface cavities in primary teeth. Background: Restorative procedures are typically used to treat caries in primary teeth. Due to their improved preservation of the natural tooth structure and their adhesion to the remaining tooth structure, CR and GIC have drawn attention as the preferred restorative materials. In the literature, over the past 20 years, the term HVGIC has developed. Compared to C-GICs, HVGICs appear to have a higher survival rate. However, isolated studies provide contradictory findings regarding the durability of restorations in primary teeth. Materials and methods: Major electronic databases were thoroughly searched to find publications from the years 2000 to 2021. Studies included were randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials on children aged 3-13 years, in which restoration of primary teeth using HVGIC and CR was performed. Results: This systematic review includes four studies [three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one nonrandomized controlled trial]. No statistically significant difference between these materials was seen in any of the included studies. Conclusion: This systematic review of findings supports the assertion that both HVGIC and CR restorations deliver satisfactory outcomes in terms of clinical efficacy and overall survivability. It was found that, for both materials, class I restorations had statistically higher survival rates than class II restorations. Long-term studies are essential to evaluate the clinical efficacy of both restorations. Clinical significance: This systematic review outlines the application of HVGIC and CR as restorative materials for pediatric dentists to use in their everyday dental practices. How to cite this article: Krishnakumar K, Kalaskar R, Kalaskar A,

Indexed as

Clinical effectivenessComposite resinHigh-viscosity glass ionomerPrimary teethSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39184894
PMCPMC11339472

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.