ReviewInternational journal of dentistry2026
Comparative Efficacy of Silver Diamine Fluoride and Sodium Fluoride in Managing Early Childhood Caries: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in International journal of dentistry, 2026. 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.
- Comparative Efficacy of Silver Diamine Fluoride and Sodium Fluoride in Managing Early Childhood Caries: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of dentistry · 2026Review
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
Background: Early childhood caries (ECC) is a prevalent condition in preschool children that can impair nutrition and development. Comparative evidence on silver diamine fluoride (SDF) versus sodium fluoride (NaF) for arresting ECC remains limited. Objectives: To compare the efficacy of topical SDF and NaF in arresting ECC lesions and to evaluate effects on decayed, missing, and filled surfaces (DMFS). Data Sources: PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from January 1990 through April 2024. Reference lists of included studies were hand-searched. Eligibility Criteria: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) directly comparing topical SDF and NaF in children aged 0-6 years with ECC and reporting outcomes for lesion arrest or DMFS. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using RoB 2. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. Number of Studies and Participants: Nine RCTs met inclusion criteria (total sample size reported in main text). Synthesis Methods: Random-effects meta-analysis (DerSimonian-Laird) was used to pool odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed with Results: Pooled analysis showed higher odds of caries arrest with SDF compared to NaF (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.03 -1.94), while no statistically significant difference was observed for DMFS (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.70-1.64). Heterogeneity across analyses was low to moderate, and risk-of-bias assessments identified some concerns in several trials. According to the GRADE evaluation, the certainty of evidence was rated moderate for caries arrest (downgraded for inconsistency) and low for DMFS (downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision). Conclusions: Compared with NaF, 38% SDF increases the likelihood of arresting ECC lesions while producing similar effects on DMFS. Clinical selection should balance lesion depth, aesthetic considerations, and patient-level factors.
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.