Question · asked by 1 review

Glass carbomer vs Resin-modified glass-ionomer cement + composite resin (modified open-sandwich restoration): Restoration failure

Population
Children with carious primary teeth
Intervention
Glass carbomer
Comparison
Resin-modified glass-ionomer cement + composite resin (modified open-sandwich restoration)
Outcome
Restoration failure

No comparative effect estimate was reported; glass carbomer had the highest tabulated failure range.

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Glass carbomer vs Resin-modified GIC and composite resin
Restoration failure · Children with carious primary teeth · 1 year, University, Class II
No comparative effect estimate was reported; glass carbomer had the highest tabulated failure range.
Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious primary teeth without pulp… (2022) All outcomes
Annual failure rate (%) RMGIC 1.9-7.5%; glass carbomer 5.8-46.2%; composite resin 2.1%1 study · 50 participantsGRADE not reported

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

Studies behind the findings

The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.

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.