Question · asked by 1 review
30% silver diamine fluoride vs Glass ionomer cement (GIC): Coronal carious lesions prevention
- Population
- Children with coronal carious lesions (primary dentition)
- Intervention
- 30% silver diamine fluoride
- Comparison
- Glass ionomer cement (GIC)
- Outcome
- Coronal carious lesions prevention
One review reported glass ionomer cement was more effective than 30% SDF at 12 months (PF −6%), but the difference was not statistically significant (ungraded).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
30% silver diamine fluoride vs Glass ionomer cement Coronal carious lesions prevention · Children with coronal carious lesions (primary dentition) · 12 months, Primary dentition One review reported glass ionomer cement was more effective than 30% SDF at 12 months (PF −6%), but the difference was not statistically significant (ungraded). Silver diamine fluoride for managing carious lesions: an umbrella review. (2019) All outcomes | Prevented Fraction -6 | Not reported | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Silver diamine fluoride for managing carious lesions: an umbrella review. 2019 All outcomes | June 2018 | 15 | Not applicable |
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.