ReviewThe Japanese dental science review2026
Remineralising efficacy of bioactive glass and casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium phosphate in white spot lesions or early enamel caries: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials.
Review in The Japanese dental science review, 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.
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
Fluoride has always been used as a gold standard in preventing early enamel caries, however due to its demerits, newer remineralising agents such as casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP) and bioactive glass (BAG) have been developed to either substitute or as an adjuvant to fluoride in managing white spot lesions (WSLs). A systematic search of five databases was conducted up to August 2025 following PRISMA guidelines. Eligible RCTs evaluated CPP-ACP or BAG in permanent teeth with WSLs or early enamel caries. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB-2 tool, and certainty of evidence with GRADE. Sixteen RCTs were included (3 BAG, 13 CPP-ACP). BAG showed greater remineralisation than fluoride and CPP-ACP in two studies. Five studies favored CPP-ACP over fluoride. Formulations containing CPP-ACP with fluoride showed slight advantages over CPP-ACP alone. Considerable heterogeneity in outcome measures and a high or unclear risk of bias was identified across most studies. Certainty of evidence was rated low to moderate. Both BAG and CPP-ACP demonstrate remineralising potential, with BAG particularly fluoride-containing formulations showing more consistent results. Current evidence remains insufficient to replace fluoride as the standard. High-quality multicentre RCTs with standardised outcomes are needed.
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.