Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39195094›Full record

ArticleDentistry journal2024

Determining the Failure Rate of Direct Restorations-Chart Review versus Electronic Health Record Reports.

Priyal Patel, Utsavi Kapadia, Janhvi Vyas, Sahil Mhay, Romesh P Nalliah

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Dentistry journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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.

Priyal PatelOffice of Patient Services, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.
Utsavi KapadiaOffice of Patient Services, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9119-7475
Janhvi VyasFaculty in Periodontics and Oral Medicine Department, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.
Sahil MhayOffice of Patient Services, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.
Romesh P NalliahUniversity of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6287-0656

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Amalgam and composite restorations are used to treat minor dental issues. University of Michigan, School of Dentistry Electronic Health Record (EHR) reports show a 2.31% failure rate for amalgam and 1.14% for composite. Our study aims to determine the true failure rates through manual EHR chart reviews. Patient data from the University of Michigan School of Dentistry were utilized-216 amalgam restorations from 2020 to 2022 and 350 composite restorations in 2021 were searched. We defined

Indexed as

academiaanterior versus posterior composite restorationclinical performance of amalgam and composite restorationsdental documentationdental school settingfailure rate of amalgam–composite restorationsfailure rate of restorationimportance of documentationreason for failurereasons for dental restoration failurerestoration failureuniversity settings

Identifiers

PMID39195094
PMCPMC11352568

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.