Trial reportBMC oral health2025
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.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05930548 (Clinical Evaluation of Low-shrinkage Giomer Resin Composite Versus Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer in Treatment of Cervical Caries Lesions), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Clinical Evaluation of Low-shrinkage Giomer Resin Composite Versus Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer in Treatment of Cervical Caries Lesions: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
backgroundCervical carious lesions present a clinical challenge due to several factors and require restorative materials with optimal performance. This trial evaluated the clinical performance and cost-effectiveness of low-shrinkage giomer resin composite (LS-GRC) compared to resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) for restoring cervical carious lesions over a 12-month period. PARTICIPANTS AND
methodsA total of 56 class V cavities were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 28). Intervention group received LS-GRC (Beautifil II LS, Shofu Dental Corporation, Kyoto, Japan), and control group received RMGI (Fuji II LC, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). Restorations were evaluated using revised FDI criteria at baseline, 6, and 12 months. Data were statistically analyzed with a significance level of P ≤ 0.05. Intergroup comparisons were assessed with Chi-squared test, while intragroup comparisons were assessed with Cochran's Q test. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and cost per success ratio (CPSR) were used for cost-effectiveness analysis.
resultsAfter 12 months, intergroup comparisons revealed no significant differences for all outcomes (P > 0.05), except for surface luster and texture, which favored LS-GRC (P < 0.05). Intragroup comparisons revealed no significant differences within LS-GRC group (P > 0.016), while within RMGI group, significant differences were observed for surface luster and texture after 12 months (P < 0.016). ICER analysis showed that the cost for each additional 1% improvement in clinical outcomes with LS-GRC was approximately 1.6 times higher than that of RMGI. The CPSR for LS-GRC was 4.6% lower than that of RMGI, indicating that, despite its higher initial cost, LS-GRC provided comparable clinical performance, with significantly improved esthetic surface quality and favorable cost-effectiveness over the 12-month period.
conclusionsLS-GRC and RMGI exhibited comparable performance and were clinically acceptable after 12 months. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Low-shrinkage giomer resin composite offers bioactivity, superior restoration integrity, and excellent esthetics, helping achieve optimal cervical restorations with improved clinical success, durability, and sustained cost-effectiveness.
trial registrationhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/ , (NCT05930548), 30-06-2023.
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.