Hall technique vs Non-restorative caries treatment: Major failure
It is very uncertain whether preformed metal crown (fitted using the Hall Technique) changes major failure compared with non-restorative caries treatment (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Preformed metal crown (fitted using the Hall Technique) vs Non-restorative caries treatment Major failure · Children with decayed primary molar teeth · 12 months It is very uncertain whether preformed metal crown (fitted using the Hall Technique) changes major failure compared with non-restorative caries treatment (very low certainty). Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth (2015) · Cochrane All outcomes | RR 0.12 [0.01, 2.18] | 1 study · 92 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2015-01 | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
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.