ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2025
Clinical evaluation of giomer-based injectable resin composite versus resin-modified glass ionomer in class V carious lesions over 18 months: A randomized clinical trial.
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- One-year clinical evaluation of a giomer-based injectable composite compared with a highly viscous glass-ionomer cement in restoring class II cavities of primary molars: a randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Clinical performance and cost-effectiveness of low-shrinkage giomer resin composite versus resin-modified glass ionomer in cervical carious lesions: a 12-month randomized controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Comparative clinical evaluation of direct-indirect heat tempered and direct composite restoration technique in noncarious cervical lesions: A split-mouth randomized clinical.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Performance of composite-reinforced glass ionomer liners in class V restorations.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Article
- Sample size calculation practices in original research articles of the Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics (2021-2025).Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Clinical evaluation of bioactive composite resin in class V lesions in high-risk caries patients: A randomized split-mouth trial.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This randomized clinical trial aimed to evaluate the clinical performance of giomer-based injectable resin composite (GIRC) versus resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) in class V carious lesions over 18 months. Participants and Methods: Thirty participants with a cervical carious lesion were recruited and allotted to two groups (n = 15); Group 1 received GIRC (Beautifil Flow Plus X F03, Shofu Dental Corporation, Kyoto, Japan), and Group 2 received RMGI (Fuji II LC, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). Materials were placed according to the manufactures' instructions. Restorations were evaluated using the modified United States Public Health Service criteria at baseline, after 6, 12, and 18 months. Data were statistically analyzed with the significance level set at (P ≤ 0.05) where categorical data as frequency, percentage, and intergroup comparisons were performed using the Chi-squared test and intragroup comparison using Cochran's Q-test. Results: Intergroup and intragroup comparisons showed no statistically significant difference between GIRC and RMGI at different time intervals for marginal adaptation, marginal staining, surface texture, secondary caries, retention, and postoperative sensitivity. Conclusion: GIRC and RMGI showed similar clinical performance and are clinically acceptable after 18-month follow-up period.
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.