Gap finder
Search review questions
Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.
53 questions in 7 reviews · intervention: Restorative materials · outcome domain: Restoration survival/failure
current versionsNo studies 1 · 1.9%Ungraded 50 · 94.3%Very low 0 · 0%Low 2 · 3.8%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Intervention categories, outcome domains and clusters are a proposed key pending human validation. Clear all filters
| Question | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
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 Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis. (2020) | Proportion 0.909 [0.785, 0.965] | 12 studies | Ungraded |
Adhesively bonded amalgam restorations in conventional preparations utilising deliberate retention (all bonding agents) vs Traditional non‐bonded amalgam restorations Marginal deterioration of the restoration and fracture of the remaining tooth tissue · Adults and adolescents with permanent posterior molar and premolar teeth suitable for Class I and II, but excluding… · Mean 24 months Adhesively bonded versus non‐bonded amalgam restorations for dental caries (2016) · Cochrane | Marginal deterioration of the restoration and fracture of the remaining tooth tissue - Follow‐up: mean 24 months | Study population | Relative effect (95% CI): Not estimable | Number of participants (studies): 31 (1… | 1 study · 31 participants | Low |
Resin composite restorations (filling and bonding systems) containing antibacterial agents vs Composite restorations not containing antibacterial agents Postoperative sensitivity, marginal adaptation, anatomic form and other clinical outcomes (USPHS restoration quality; includes tooth vitality and pulpitis) · Adults and adolescents in any age group with restorations in the permanent dentition and children with restorations in… Antibacterial agents in composite restorations for the prevention of dental caries (2013) · Cochrane | No studies were included in this review, as we were unable to find any trials directly comparing antibacterial containing composites to other active interventions or controls. | 0 studies | No studies |