ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry2026
Comparative Evaluation of Obturation Quality of Pediatric Single Rotary File Systems for Pulpectomy in Primary Molars through KEDOO Classification: An
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. 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
Introduction: For the morphologically challenging primary root canals, the quality of obturation through pulpectomy was assessed only through the Coll and Sadrian Criteria. KEDOO Classification was introduced as the latest, which assesses the quality of obturation by being canal, segment and arch-specific, improving the assessment quality of obturation during pulpectomy done by pediatric single rotary files. Objectives: To evaluate the obturation quality of pediatric single rotary file systems through KEDOO classification. Materials and methods: The study population ( Results: Kedo S Plus files produced better obturation quality when compared to Kedo S square files. Conclusion: KEDOO classification eliminated the limitations of existing Coll and Sadrian criteria of obturation quality assessment. How to cite this article: Lakshmi PN, Nangia T, Jeevanandan G,
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.