ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2025
Is silver diamine fluoride more effective than sodium fluoride varnish at preventing caries in upper anterior primary teeth?
Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effect of silver diamine fluoride versus fluoride varnish in arresting early childhood caries: A clinical study.Bioinformation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
a commentary onZheng F M, Yan I G, Duangthip D, Lo E C M, Gao S S, Chu C H. Randomized clinical trial on caries prevention of silver diamine fluoride. J Dent Res 2025; https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345251363837 .
designThis randomised controlled trial sought to compare the effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) to sodium fluoride varnish (NaF) for the prevention of caries in anterior primary teeth for young children. The inclusion criteria were children aged 3-4 years of age. Children were excluded if they had co-operative challenges or were on long-term medications. Children with active caries were included, lesions were considered active if they were soft on probing. The setting was kindergartens in Hong Kong. The children received either 38% SDF or 5% NaF applied to their six upper anterior primary teeth at six-monthly intervals. The primary outcome measure was the mean number of new carious surfaces per child at 30 months follow-up. Intention-to-treat analysis was used with the Mann-Whitney U test applied for the analysis of the primary outcome.
resultsOverall, 730 children were randomised, 621 (85%) were followed up and analysed at the 30 months end point for the presence of new carious surfaces (dmfs). Not all children seen at baseline were analysed, however of those that were their caries experience was similar with a mean dmfs of 0.47 ± 1.35 for the SDF group and 0.48 ± 1.53 for the NaF group. At 30 months, there were less new lesions for those in the SDF group (0.35 ± 1.09), than the NaF group (0.54 ± 1.50) (p = 0.048).
conclusionsThe authors concluded that SDF was more effective than NaF in preventing new carious surfaces at 30 months for anterior caries in primary teeth of young children.
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.