ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation and comparison of mandibular molar root canal filling quality performed by undergraduate preclinical dental students.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative evaluation of the cyclic fatigue resistance of four Ni-Ti instruments in simulated root canal curvatures using CAD/CAM technology.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Efficacy of root end cavity preparation techniques on gap formation of different mineral trioxide aggregate based root end filling materials: micro-computed tomography study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- RCFLA-YOLO: a deep learning-driven framework for the automated assessment of root canal filling quality in periapical radiographs.BMC medical education · 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
The present study aims to evaluate the quality of root canal fillings (RCFs) on extracted mandibular molars performed by undergraduate students during their preclinical training which spans 2 academic years. Endodontics records and periapical radiographs of 260 extracted human first and second mandibular molars without site specification consisted the sample of this retrospective cross-sectional study. All root canal fillings were performed by undergraduate students during the preclinical phase of their training The samples collected were assessed using radiographs based on three quality criteria: length, density, and taper. Chi-square test was used for statistical analysis and Cohen's Kappa coefficient was implemented to assess inter-rater reliability. The majority of the evaluated RCFs were of inadequate quality. Of the 260 mandibular molars included in the study, 67 (25.8%) were deemed sufficient in terms of overall technical quality across both academic years. 3rd-year students (44.5%) were significantly more efficient compared to their 2nd- year counterparts (12.0%) regarding the overall technical quality of RCFs (p < 0.05). RCFs performed by the 3rd -year students, were of relatively higher quality compared with those performed by the 2nd-year trainees. However, the overall technical quality of RCFs was inadequate. Improvement of the current curriculum should be considered by incorporating contemporary techniques and materials to enhance the performance of undergraduate students on RCFs, before entering the clinical phase of their training.
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.