Question · asked by 1 review
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator: Retention success rate
For the Rubber dam isolation: Yes subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.931 (95% CI 0.834-0.973; ungraded).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Rubber dam isolation: Yes For the Rubber dam isolation: Yes subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.931 (95% CI 0.834-0.973; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.931 [0.834, 0.973] | 10 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Reporting bias: No For the Reporting bias: No subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.867 (95% CI 0.779-0.924; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.867 [0.779, 0.924] | 24 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Assessor blinding (triple-blind): Yes For the Assessor blinding (triple-blind): Yes subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.805 (95% CI 0.674-0.892; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.805 [0.674, 0.892] | 16 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Assessor blinding (triple-blind): No For the Assessor blinding (triple-blind): No subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.934 (95% CI 0.859-0.971; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.934 [0.859, 0.971] | 11 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Material type: Resin-based material + self-etching adhesion For the Material type: Resin-based material + self-etching adhesion subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.824 (95% CI 0.672-0.914; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.824 [0.672, 0.914] | 8 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Dentist experience: Non-experienced For the Dentist experience: Non-experienced subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.554 (95% CI 0.168-0.885; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.554 [0.168, 0.885] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Cavity form: Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) For the Cavity form: Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.649 (95% CI 0.488-0.783; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.649 [0.488, 0.783] | 8 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Material type: Open sandwich restoration For the Material type: Open sandwich restoration subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.950 (95% CI 0.639-0.995; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.950 [0.639, 0.995] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months Tooth-coloured proximal restorations in primary molars had a pooled 24-month retention success rate of 0.879 (95% CI 0.803-0.928; ungraded), with high heterogeneity (I2 = 90%). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.879 [0.803, 0.928] | 27 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Reporting bias: Yes For the Reporting bias: Yes subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.935 (95% CI 0.726-0.987; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.935 [0.726, 0.987] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Use of coat: Yes For the Use of coat: Yes subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.904 (95% CI 0.474-0.989; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.904 [0.474, 0.989] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Material type: Resin-based material + total-etching adhesion For the Material type: Resin-based material + total-etching adhesion subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.949 (95% CI 0.868-0.981; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.949 [0.868, 0.981] | 7 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Use of cavity conditioner: Yes For the Use of cavity conditioner: Yes subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.826 (95% CI 0.605-0.937; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.826 [0.605, 0.937] | 10 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Trim-and-fill adjusted (publication-bias sensitivity) After trim-and-fill adjustment the retention success rate fell only slightly to 0.839 (95% CI 0.764-0.893), so publication bias was judged negligible (ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.839 [0.764, 0.893] | 34 (27 observed + 7 imputed) studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Cavity form: Conventional cavity design For the Cavity form: Conventional cavity design subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.936 (95% CI 0.895-0.961; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.936 [0.895, 0.961] | 19 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Study design: Randomized controlled trial For the Study design: Randomized controlled trial subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.854 (95% CI 0.718-0.931; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.854 [0.718, 0.931] | 15 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Random assignment: No/Incorrect For the Random assignment: No/Incorrect subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.897 (95% CI 0.792-0.952; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.897 [0.792, 0.952] | 12 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Material type: Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) For the Material type: Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.956 (95% CI 0.865-0.986; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.956 [0.865, 0.986] | 5 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Use of cavity conditioner: No For the Use of cavity conditioner: No subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.973 (95% CI 0.695-0.998; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.973 [0.695, 0.998] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Random assignment: Correct For the Random assignment: Correct subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.851 (95% CI 0.716-0.929; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.851 [0.716, 0.929] | 15 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Dentist experience: Experienced For the Dentist experience: Experienced subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.895 (95% CI 0.828-0.938; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.895 [0.828, 0.938] | 25 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Study design: Nonrandomized controlled trial For the Study design: Nonrandomized controlled trial subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.899 (95% CI 0.768-0.961; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.899 [0.768, 0.961] | 9 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Rubber dam isolation: No For the Rubber dam isolation: No subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.847 (95% CI 0.726-0.920; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.847 [0.726, 0.920] | 14 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Use of coat: No For the Use of coat: No subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.854 (95% CI 0.609-0.956; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.854 [0.609, 0.956] | 9 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Material type: High-viscosity glass ionomer cement (HVGIC) For the Material type: High-viscosity glass ionomer cement (HVGIC) subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.671 (95% CI 0.447-0.838; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.671 [0.447, 0.838] | 6 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Study design: Noncontrolled trial For the Study design: Noncontrolled trial subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.892 (95% CI 0.614-0.977; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.892 [0.614, 0.977] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Financial source: Private or mixed For the Financial source: Private or mixed subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.807 (95% CI 0.482-0.949; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.807 [0.482, 0.949] | 5 studies | GRADE not reported |
Tooth-coloured direct restorative materials (composite, compomer, giomer, RMGIC, HVGIC, open-sandwich) vs No comparator group (single-arm pooled success rate; materials/techniques contrasted via moderator analyses) Retention success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations · 24 months, Financial source: Public For the Financial source: Public subgroup, the 24-month retention success rate was 0.909 (95% CI 0.785-0.965; ungraded). Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | Proportion 0.909 [0.785, 0.965] | 12 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. 2020 All outcomes | May 2019 (search covered 1985 to May 2019) | 17 | Critically Low / Critically Low |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.