ArticleCureus2026
Evaluation of Treatment Approaches Adopted by General Dentists for Early Childhood Caries.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
introductionEarly childhood caries (ECC) remains a major challenge in pediatric oral healthcare because of its high prevalence and complex treatment needs. The present study aimed to compare the treatment options adopted by general dentists for the management of ECC and to evaluate the influence of dentist experience, child age, and caries severity on treatment selection. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis cross-sectional, observational study was conducted among 150 general dentists between October 2021 and March 2022. Each dentist was observed during five consecutive consultations involving children aged two to five years diagnosed with ECC, resulting in 750 observed cases. Treatment modalities were categorized as fluoride varnish/remineralization therapy, atraumatic restorative treatment (ART), conventional restorations, preformed metal crowns, and extraction. Using a standardized observation checklist, data were recorded on dentist experience, child age, the dmft index (where d represents decayed primary teeth, m indicates missing teeth due to caries, f denotes filled primary teeth, and t stands for teeth), and parental presence. All analyses were performed using chi-square tests.
resultsAmong the participating dentists, 112 (74.7%) practiced in private clinics, whereas parental presence during consultations was observed in 531 (70.8%) cases. Dentists with less than five years of experience more frequently selected fluoride varnish/remineralization (n = 74, 30.8%) and ART (n = 64, 26.7%), whereas dentists with more than 10 years of experience preferred preformed metal crowns and extractions (p < 0.001). Younger children aged two to three years predominantly received preventive treatments, whereas older children aged four to five years more commonly underwent conventional restorations and preformed metal crowns (p < 0.001). Increasing dmft severity was significantly associated with invasive treatment approaches, including extractions in the high dmft group (p < 0.001).
conclusionTreatment selection for ECC varied significantly according to dentist experience, age, and severity. Preventive and minimally invasive approaches are commonly adopted in younger children and in less severe cases, whereas invasive procedures increase with the severity of the disease. These findings highlight the importance of evidence-based minimally invasive strategies in pediatric dental practice.
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.