ReviewDental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology2026
Evidence Mapping and Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials in Dental Traumatology.
Review in Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dental Traumatology in Contemporary Practice: From Evidence to Education and Clinical Practice.Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology · 2026Article
- Shifts in dental trauma research (2000-2025): a literature-based thematic analysis using topic modeling.BMC oral health · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsThis evidence mapping (EM) and quality assessment of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in Dental Traumatology (DT) aimed to identify the RCTs, distribute them in different domains and subdomains, analyze their methodological characteristics, and assess their quality.
methodsA protocol was developed as per the principles of Global-Evidence-Mapping (EM) and registered in open-sciences-framework. A systematic electronic search was performed in the PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, Web of Science, LILACS, and COCHRANE on September 30, 2025. Grey literature and reference searches were also performed. RCTs with intervention arms with/without a control group, having details of randomization related to any domain of DT, were included after screening of titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. Studies were distributed in domains and subdomains, and data related to demographic and methodological characteristics were extracted and analyzed. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB-2) and details were presented in the form of an abacus EM plot.
resultsThe study identified 30 RCTs in four domains of DT, with the highest in the therapeutic domain and subdomain of treatment protocols in permanent dentition. Seven studies were published before 2010, nine between 2010 and 2019, and 14 others from 2020 to date. They represented 13 countries, with the highest from China, the United Kingdom, and India. A protocol was registered in 10 studies, and the majority of the studies had not followed Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. Only three RCTs were found to have a low ROB.
conclusionThe majority of studies exhibited a lack of methodological robustness in defining their hypothesis, sample size estimation, randomization, and statistical evaluation of outcomes. This was the reason for 27 of them being graded as having high ROB or some concerns. The results of this EM may help researchers in identifying the areas for future research and guide them to follow the best practices in the planning and conduct of RCTs.
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.