SynthesisScientific reports2025
Systematic review and meta analysis of first and second generation bioceramic materials in primary dentition pulpotomies.
Synthesis 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.
- Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Calcium-Silicate-Based Materials in Primary-Tooth Pulpotomy: An Umbrella Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Contemporary biomimetic and bioactive materials in paediatric dentistry: a narrative review.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Review
- Advanced Platelet-Rich Fibrin Plus Sealed Exclusively with Glass Ionomer Cement: Setting a New Standard for Healing, Aesthetics and Predictive Modelling in Regenerative Endodontics.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Calcium silicate-based materials are considered the gold standard in vital pulp therapy due to their ability to induce favorable repair responses. Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), a first-generation bioceramic cement, has demonstrated high clinical and radiographic success rates but is associated with disadvantages such as coronal discoloration, difficult handling, and long setting time. To address these issues, second-generation bioceramic cements were developed with improved chemical composition, radiopacifiers, and handling properties. This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and included a comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, SciELO, LILACS, and TRIP databases from 2011 up to August 2023. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to compare the clinical and radiographic success rates of first- and second-generation bioceramics in pulpotomies of primary teeth, with heterogeneity assessed using the I
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.