Bioactive restorative materials (RMGIC and compomer combined) vs Resin composite restoration: Secondary caries
In deciduous teeth at 1 year, pooled bioactive materials (RMGIC and compomer) showed no significant difference from resin composite in secondary caries (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.07-4.10; ungraded).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Bioactive restorative materials (RMGIC and compomer combined) vs Resin composite (RC) Secondary caries (occurrence) · Patients requiring dental restoration; deciduous (primary) teeth · 1 year of follow-up, Restorative dentistry clinical settings; primary studies conducted across multiple countries, Overall (all bioactive vs resin composite) In deciduous teeth at 1 year, pooled bioactive materials (RMGIC and compomer) showed no significant difference from resin composite in secondary caries (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.07-4.10; ungraded). Clinical efficacy of bioactive restorative materials in controlling secondary caries: a systematic review… (2023) All outcomes | RR 0.54 [0.07, 4.10] | 3 studies · 321 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical efficacy of bioactive restorative materials in controlling secondary caries: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. 2023 All outcomes | Not specified (search date reported only in Supplementary Table S1) | 63 | Low / 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.