Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39253936›Full record

SynthesisCurrent pediatric reviews2026

Mapping Systematic Reviews on the Management of Dental Caries in Primary Teeth: A Meta-research.

Aline MaquinE Pascareli-Carlos, Thais Marchezini Reis, Tatiane Fernandes de Novaes, Anelise Fernandes Montagner, Francoise Helene van de Sande, Thais Gimenez, Daniela Procida Raggio, Tamara Kerber Tedesco

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current pediatric reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Aline MaquinE Pascareli-CarlosDepartment of Dentistry, Cruzeiro do Sul University, São Paulo (SP), Brazil.
Thais Marchezini ReisDepartment of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo (SP), Brazil.
Tatiane Fernandes de NovaesDepartment of Dentistry, Cruzeiro do Sul University, São Paulo (SP), Brazil.
Anelise Fernandes MontagnerDepartment of Dentistry, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas (RS), Brazil.
Francoise Helene van de SandeDepartment of Dentistry, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas (RS), Brazil.
Thais GimenezGraduate Program in Health and Environment, Universidade Metropolitana de Santos, Santos (SP), Brazil.
Daniela Procida RaggioDepartment of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo (SP), Brazil.
Tamara Kerber TedescoDepartment of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo (SP), Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSystematic reviews (SRs) represent the most robust source of evidence for informing decision-making. While there are rigorous protocols for properly conducting SRs, sometimes the methodological biases in the primary studies are accounted for in the conclusions of the SRs.

objectivesThis study aimed to map the evidence regarding the management of caries lesions in primary teeth.

methodsTwo reviewers conducted a systematic search up to March 2024 in electronic databases. Any SR concerning the management of caries lesions in primary teeth was considered eligible.

resultsAbout 162 SRs were included. Among these, 80 focused on restorative treatments, 64 on endodontic treatments, and 18 on non-invasive treatments. Only 42.6% presented a study registration protocol. The majority (67.9%) performed a meta-analysis, while a minority exclusively carried out qualitative data analysis. Despite 92.6% of the SRs evaluating the methodological quality or risk of bias of the primary studies using some tool, only 24% assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach, resulting in classifications ranging from very low to moderate.

conclusionThere is a limited adherence to study registration protocols, indicating a need for improvements in this practice. Additionally, among the few SRs that used the GRADE approach, the majority demonstrated levels of very low to moderate certainty.

Indexed as

Dental CariesTooth, DeciduousHumansSystematic Reviews as TopicDental cariesevidence-based dentistryGRADE approach.meta-researchmethodological qualitypediatric dentistrysystematic reviews

Identifiers

PMID39253936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.