Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

2 questions · 4 findings · 1 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 4 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Resin-based fissure sealant vs Glass-ionomer cement-based fissure sealants

Retention-to-caries risk ratio (RCR) · Patients with fissure-sealed permanent molar teeth

In the sensitivity analysis, the difference in retention-to-caries risk ratio between resin- and glass-ionomer cement-based sealants was not statistically significant (p = 0.069; ungraded).

2 findings from 1 review

Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review. 2013 All outcomes
Longest follow-up per trial · Sensitivity analysis
Mean RCR (retention-to-caries risk ratio); t-test of difference Resin vs GIC difference not statistically significant (p=0.069); sensitivity-analysis mean RCRs not reported
14 studies
GRADE not reported
Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review. 2013 All outcomes
At least 24 months · Main analysis
Mean RCR (retention-to-caries risk ratio); t-test of difference Resin mean RCR 9.64 (SD 24.58) vs GIC 13.68 (SD 13.72); p=0.017
62 studies
GRADE not reported

Resin-based fissure sealant vs No comparator

Association between loss of complete retention risk and caries occurrence risk · Patients with fissure-sealed permanent molar teeth

Loss of complete sealant retention was directly associated with caries occurrence for resin-based sealants in the main analysis (regression slope 0.89, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.23; ungraded).

2 findings from 1 review

Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review. 2013 All outcomes
At least 24 months · Main analysis
Regression slope (ln caries risk on ln retention-loss risk) 0.89 [0.56, 1.23]
54 studies · 17377 participants
GRADE not reported
Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review. 2013 All outcomes
Longest follow-up per trial · Sensitivity analysis
Regression slope (ln caries risk on ln retention-loss risk) 0.53 [-0.27, 1.32]
14 studies · 3154 participants
GRADE not reported