Trial reportLasers in medical science2026
Clinical effectiveness of Er, Cr: YSGG laser compared with conventional rotary instrumentation for caries removal in primary teeth: a randomized split-mouth clinical trial.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare the clinical efficacy of erbium, chromium-doped yttrium scandium gallium garnet (Er, Cr: YSGG) laser versus conventional air-rotor handpiece for caries removal in primary teeth and their effects on children's anxiety and pain levels, to provide evidence for optimizing pediatric dental treatment. A total of 90 children (aged 6-10 years) with primary tooth caries were enrolled. Using a split-mouth design, two carious teeth from each child were randomly assigned to air-rotor handpiece treatment (Group A, 90 teeth) or Er, Cr: YSGG laser treatment (Group B, 90 teeth). Clinical efficacy, restoration quality (United States Public Health Service [USPHS] criteria), masticatory function (bite force, chewing efficiency), adverse events, and children's anxiety (Venham Anxiety and Behavior Rating Scale, Faces Image Scale [FIS], pulse rate) and pain levels (Wong-Baker FACES
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.