Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

828 questions · 1,007 findings · 63 reviews · All outcomes

No studies found 110 · 10.9%GRADE not reported 709 · 70.4%Very low 84 · 8.3%Low 70 · 7%Moderate 33 · 3.3%High 1 · 0.1%

Calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement vs Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth
2 findings from 1 review

ProRoot MTA vs RetroMTA

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

ProRoot MTA showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with retroMTA; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Vitapex (calcium hydroxide/iodoform) vs Sealapex (eugenol-free calcium hydroxide)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Vitapex (calcium hydroxide/iodoform) showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with sealapex (eugenol-free calcium hydroxide); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Glutaraldehyde + zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE) vs Full strength formocresol (FC)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Glutaraldehyde + zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE) showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with full strength formocresol (FC); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review