ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry2025
Comparative Study of Esthetic Outcome of Pedo Shades of Composite Resin-A Randomized Controlled Trial:
Article in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study aims to compare and evaluate parental satisfaction with three different pediatric composite resins. Study design: This study employed both Subjects and methods: The study involved obtaining informed consent from participants and assigning subjects to three groups. Group I consisted of 10 samples treated with Activa Kids bioactive, group II had 10 samples treated with Kedo E max, and group III included 10 samples treated with FGM Vittra unique flow. Thirty samples were collected for each of Results and statistics: The results indicated a significant preference for Activa™ Kids Bioactive-Restorative in terms of appearance, color match, size, contour, and overall satisfaction compared to the other two composite resins. Spectrophotometric analysis showed minimal color change postrestoration with Kedo E max, followed by Activa™ Kids Bioactive-Restorative. Conclusion: The study concluded that both Activa™ Kids Bioactive-Restorative and Kedo E max exhibited good shade-matching capabilities and overall esthetic outcomes compared to FGM Vittra APS, which is unique in restoring primary incisors. Activa™ Kids Bioactive-Restorative garnered higher parental satisfaction, while Kedo E max demonstrated superior color-matching outcomes. These findings provide valuable guidance for dentists and patients in selecting the most suitable pediatric composite resin for achieving optimal esthetic outcomes and patient satisfaction in anterior teeth restorations. How to cite this article: Raj P, Choubey S, Doneria D,
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.