ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry2026
Comparison of Remineralization Potential of Different Remineralizing Agents on Carious Lesion of Primary Teeth: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in International journal of clinical pediatric 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.
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
Aims: To compare the remineralization potential of nanohydroxyapatite (nHA), fluoridated nano hydroxyapatite (NHA-F), nanosilver fluoride (NSF), bioactive glass (BAG), nanobioactive glass (nBAG), silver diamine fluoride (SDF), sodium fluoride (NaF), casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP), tricalcium phosphate (TCP) and fluoride in primary teeth. Materials and methods: This study has included articles from databases such as MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, ERIC, and ScienceDirect published until December 31, 2023. The search resulted in the display of 3086 articles, of which 1396 cited as duplicates were eliminated, eventually providing with 15 articles for review after being subjected to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Statistical analysis: The extracted data were analysed in qualitative and quantitative methods, along with the generation of forest plots using RevMan software version 5. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUIN tool. Results: 15 studies were included in the qualitative and 8 in the quantitative synthesis. The nHA vs Naf comparison resulted in pooled value [OR (CI)] 0.01 [95% CI (1.13 to 1.15)] Conclusions: This study concluded that the newer nanoparticulate and the nonfluoridated remineralizing agents are as effective as or more effective than other agents. Key messages: This study highlights the newer agents, such as nanoparticulate and nonfluoridated remineralizing agents' potential in comparison to other commonly used agents, and focuses more on remineralization of primary teeth as a preventive treatment option.
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.