Anatomic form success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations
The pooled 24-month anatomic form success rate was 0.901 (95% CI 0.845-0.938; ungraded).
2 findings from 1 review
Proportion 0.901 [0.845, 0.938]
24 studies
GRADE not reported
Proportion 0.876 [0.817, 0.919]
29 (24 observed + 5 imputed) studies
GRADE not reported
Absence of recurrent caries success rate · Children with primary molars requiring proximal (Class II) restorations
After trim-and-fill adjustment the absence-of-recurrent-caries success rate was 0.878 (95% CI 0.828-0.915; ungraded), a negligible change.
2 findings from 1 review
Proportion 0.878 [0.828, 0.915]
38 (30 observed + 8 imputed) studies
GRADE not reported
Proportion 0.909 [0.865, 0.939]
30 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 4.79 [2.98, 7.69]
6 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 5.16 [3.50, 7.61]
11 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 4.99 [3.14, 7.93]
7 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 4.98 [4.07, 6.09]
Studies not reported
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention showed no clear difference in composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 1.36 [0.15, 12.30]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin · Dentists managing a defective direct resin composite restoration (posterior occlusal Class I; standardized vignette of a 30-year-old,…
For a defective composite restoration with open margin, surveyed dentists most often preferred replacement over repair (pooled RR 3.93; p < 0.001); ungraded.
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 5.26 [3.58, 7.71]
Studies not reported
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 3.87 [2.18, 6.86]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 2.59 [1.59, 4.22]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 3.49 [1.30, 9.36]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 5.19 [3.39, 7.94]
10 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention showed no clear difference in composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 1.90 [0.78, 4.64]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 3.09 [1.65, 5.79]
Studies not reported
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 7.59 [3.13, 18.38]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 5.15 [3.98, 6.66]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin · Dentists managing a defective direct amalgam restoration (posterior occlusal Class I; standardized vignette of a 30-year-old,…
For a defective amalgam restoration with open margin, surveyed dentists most often preferred replacement over repair (pooled RR 5.14; p < 0.001); ungraded.
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 3.71 [2.01, 6.82]
11 studies
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open margin
The intervention led to higher amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 5: open…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 6.16 [5.32, 7.14]
7 studies
GRADE not reported