Non-Cochrane · intervention · PM41013342
Comparative success of minimally invasive treatments for cavitated caries in primary teeth: a network meta-analysis.
Sahebalam Rasoul, Ghorbani Mahsa, Shirazi Alireza Sarraf, et al. · BMC oral health · 2025 · PubMed · doi:10.1186/s12903-025-06832-3
Full textEvery question was extracted from the full text, figures and supplements by two independent LLM extractors, disagreements adjudicated. Rows cite where in the review the value comes from.
Questions
21
current version
GRADE rated
19
No studies
0
Included studies
97
linked below
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 2 · 9.5%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 4.8%Moderate 18 · 85.7%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.
Review question
| Element | Planned (methods) | Found (results) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Patients with primary teeth diagnosed with cavitated lesions | 68 RCTs; children aged 3-11 y with cavitated caries in primary teeth (mostly molars); 12,094 / 11,799 / 4,097 treated teeth in the 6-, 12- and 12-24-month networks |
| Intervention | Minimally invasive treatment techniques for managing cavitated lesions in primary teeth | ART, SDF and the Hall technique (most studied); also PCR, NaF, SMART, Carisolv, Papacarie, NSF, NSSF, sealing, IPT, SCR, Carie-care, pepsin gel, SDF+KI, SDF+NaF (n=68) |
| Comparison | Conventional methods, other minimally invasive techniques (two-arm interventional), or placebo treatments | Conventional restorations (amalgam, GIC, composite, compomer, SSC), other minimally invasive techniques, and placebo/water controls |
| Outcomes | Clinical success rate of treatment (minimum 6-month follow-up) | Treatment success (lesion arrest / restoration survival); random-effects frequentist NMA odds ratios at 6, 12 and 12-24 months (64 studies analyzed; 4 excluded for high risk of bias) |
| Study designs | Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) | 68 RCTs (17 split-mouth, 51 parallel-group) |
| Timing | Minimum 6 months follow-up; outcomes analyzed at net 6, net 12, and 12 to 24 months | 6 months, 12 months, and 12-24 months |
Search date: November 2024. Databases: MEDLINE; Web of Science; EMBASE; Scopus; Cochrane CENTRAL
Questions and results
Hall technique vs Placebo
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than placebo (OR 163.59; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up'; Fig. 4; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of evidence' · same question in other reviews | OR 163.59 [10.15, 2636.00] | 44 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Hall technique vs Sealing
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 12 months · 12-month follow-up At 12 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than sealing (OR 13.93; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the twelve-month follow-up'; Fig. 6; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of… · same question in other reviews | OR 13.93 [1.34, 144.52] | 43 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than sealing (OR 90.71; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up'; Fig. 4; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of evidence' · same question in other reviews | OR 90.71 [1.57, 5243.63] | 44 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Hall technique vs Partial caries removal (PCR)
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than partial caries removal (OR 13.49; moderate certainty). Source: Results, Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up (Fig. 4) · same question in other reviews | OR 13.49 [1.83, 99.68] | 44 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Hall technique vs Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART)
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than ART (OR 10.11; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up'; Fig. 4; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of evidence' · same question in other reviews | OR 10.11 [3.03, 33.71] | 44 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 12-24 months · 12-24-month follow-up At 12 to 24 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than ART (OR 5.13; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the twelve-month to twenty-four-month follow-up'; Fig. 8; Abstract; Certainty of the results;… · same question in other reviews | OR 5.13 [1.18, 22.38] | 21 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 12 months · 12-month follow-up At 12 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than ART (OR 6.15; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the twelve-month follow-up'; Fig. 6; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of… · same question in other reviews | OR 6.15 [2.55, 14.83] | 43 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Hall technique vs Sodium fluoride varnish (NaF)
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 12 months · 12-month follow-up At 12 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than sodium fluoride varnish (OR 6.38; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the twelve-month follow-up'; Fig. 6; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of… · same question in other reviews | OR 6.38 [1.41, 28.96] | 43 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than sodium fluoride varnish (OR 8.19; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up'; Fig. 4; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of evidence' · same question in other reviews | OR 8.19 [1.44, 46.63] | 44 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Hall technique vs Silver-modified atraumatic restorative treatment (SMART)
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 12 months · 12-month follow-up At 12 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than SMART (OR 4.36; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the twelve-month follow-up'; Fig. 6; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of… · same question in other reviews | OR 4.36 [1.13, 16.77] | 43 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than SMART (OR 5.61; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up'; Fig. 4; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of evidence' · same question in other reviews | OR 5.61 [1.36, 23.08] | 44 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Hall technique vs Silver diamine fluoride (SDF)
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 12 months · 12-month follow-up At 12 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than SDF (OR 3.23; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the twelve-month follow-up'; Fig. 6; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of… · same question in other reviews | OR 3.23 [1.13, 9.22] | 43 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than SDF (OR 4.87; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up'; Fig. 4; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of evidence' · same question in other reviews | OR 4.87 [1.23, 19.30] | 44 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Hall technique vs Conventional restoration
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 12-24 months · 12-24-month follow-up At 12 to 24 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than conventional restoration (OR 4.17; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the twelve-month to twenty-four-month follow-up'; Fig. 8; Abstract; Certainty of the results;… · same question in other reviews | OR 4.17 [1.44, 12.10] | 21 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 12 months · 12-month follow-up At 12 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than conventional restoration (OR 2.92; low certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the twelve-month follow-up'; Fig. 6; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of… · same question in other reviews | OR 2.92 [1.40, 6.11] | 43 studies | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, the Hall technique had significantly higher treatment success than conventional restoration (OR 3.66; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up'; Fig. 4; Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion 'Summary of evidence' · same question in other reviews | OR 3.66 [1.29, 10.40] | 44 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Conventional restoration vs Placebo
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, conventional restorations had significantly higher treatment success than placebo (OR 44.66). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up' (Supplementary Fig. 2); Abstract; specific CINeMA rating in Supplementary… · same question in other reviews | OR 44.66 [3.22, 620.47] | 44 studies | Moderate |
Conventional restoration vs Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART)
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, conventional restorations had significantly higher treatment success than ART (OR 2.67). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up' (Supplementary Fig. 2); Abstract; specific CINeMA rating in Supplementary… · same question in other reviews | OR 2.67 [1.24, 6.15] | 44 studies | Moderate |
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 12 months · 12-month follow-up At 12 months, conventional restorations had significantly higher treatment success than ART (OR 2.10; moderate certainty). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the twelve-month follow-up' (Supplementary Fig. 7); Abstract; Certainty of the results; Discussion… · same question in other reviews | OR 2.10 [1.17, 3.78] | 43 studies | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Placebo
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, SDF had significantly higher treatment success than placebo (OR 33.62). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up' (Supplementary Fig. 3); specific CINeMA rating in Supplementary Table 7 · same question in other reviews | OR 33.62 [3.01, 375.92] | 44 studies | Ungraded |
Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) vs Placebo
Population: Children (aged 3-11 y) with cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) 6 months · 6-month follow-up At 6 months, ART had significantly higher treatment success than placebo (OR 16.18). Source: Results, 'Pooled success rate data at the six-month follow-up' (Supplementary Fig. 4); specific CINeMA rating in Supplementary Table 7 · same question in other reviews | OR 16.18 [1.21, 215.73] | 44 studies | Ungraded |
AMSTAR 2 appraisal
Two independent extractors rated each item. Their ratings are shown side by side because they have not been reconciled yet. The overall rating follows Shea et al. 2017: one critical flaw gives Low, more than one gives Critically Low.
| Item | Extractor A | Extractor B | Agree |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Research question includes PICO components | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 2Protocol established before the reviewcritical | Yes | Partial Yes | no |
| 3Choice of study designs explained | Yes | No | no |
| 4Comprehensive literature searchcritical | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 5Study selection in duplicate | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 6Data extraction in duplicate | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 7List of excluded studies with reasonscritical | Yes | No | no |
| 8Included studies described in detail | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 9Risk of bias assessed satisfactorilycritical | NRSI: N/A · RCT: Yes | RCT: Yes | no |
| 10Funding of included studies reported | No | No | yes |
| 11Appropriate meta-analysis methodscritical | NRSI: N/A · RCT: Yes | RCT: Yes | no |
| 12Impact of risk of bias on the pooled results | Yes | No | no |
| 13Risk of bias accounted for in interpretationcritical | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 14Heterogeneity explained | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 15Publication bias investigatedcritical | No | No | yes |
| 16Conflicts of interest reported | Yes | Yes | yes |
| Overall | Low | Critically Low | no |
Included primary studies 97
Open as a trial list| Study | Also included by | Outcomes it informs here | Trial PICO | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vollú 2019 Efficacy of 30% silver diamine fluoride compared to atraumatic restorative treatment on dentine caries arrestment in primary molars of… PMID:31279925 | 4 other reviews | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Abdellatif 2021 Caries arrest effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride compared to alternative restorative technique: randomized clinical trial. PMID:33387347 | 3 other reviews | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Zhi 2012 Randomized clinical trial on effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride and glass ionomer in arresting dentine caries in preschool children. PMID:22892463 | 3 other reviews | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Honkala 2003 The atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach to restoring primary teeth in a standard dental clinic. PMID:12752916 | 2 other reviews | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Mabangkhru 2020 A randomized clinical trial to arrest dentin caries in young children using silver diamine fluoride. PMID:32428523 | 2 other reviews | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Santos 2014 A new "silver-bullet" to treat caries in children--nano silver fluoride: a randomised clinical trial. PMID:24930870 | 2 other reviews | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Taifour 2002 Effectiveness of glass-ionomer (ART) and amalgam restorations in the deciduous dentition: results after 3 years. PMID:12459617 | 2 other reviews | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Tirupathi 2019 Comparative cariostatic efficacy of a novel Nano-silver fluoride varnish with 38% silver diamine fluoride varnish a double-blind… PMID:30805113 | 2 other reviews | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Abdellatif 2021 Caries arrest effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride compared to alternative restorative technique: randomized clinical trial DOI:10.1007/s40368-020-00592-0 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Abdellatif 2023 Silver diamine fluoride with sodium fluoride varnish versus silver diamine fluoride in arresting early childhood caries: a 6-months follow… PMID:37978488 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Al-Nerabieah 2020 Cariostatic efficacy and children acceptance of nano-silver fluoride versus silver diamine fluoride: a randomized controlled clinical trial DOI:10.5114/jos.2020.96939 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Chu 2002 Effectiveness of Silver Diamine Fluoride and Sodium Fluoride Varnish in Arresting Dentin Caries in Chinese Pre-school Children DOI:10.1177/0810767 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Chu 2002 Effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride and sodium fluoride varnish in arresting dentin caries in Chinese pre-school children. PMID:12407092 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Cleary 2022 A 12-Month Randomized Clinical Trial of 38% SDF vs. Restorative Treatment. PMID:35120408 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Duangthip 2018 Caries arrest by topical fluorides in preschool children: 30-month results DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2017.12.013 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Duangthip 2018 Caries arrest by topical fluorides in preschool children: 30-month results. PMID:29289726 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Fahmi 2019 Topical Effect of Silver Diamine Fluoride in Arresting Dental Caries in Primary Teeth DOI:10.5958/0976-5506.2019.01173.2 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Hesse 2014 Sealing versus partial caries removal in primary molars: a randomized clinical trial. PMID:24884684 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Hilgert 2014 Is high-viscosity glass-ionomer-cement a successor to amalgam for treating primary molars? PMID:25132283 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Liberman 2020 Survival of composite restorations after selective or total caries removal in primary teeth and predictors of failures: A 36-months… DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2019.103268 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Mabangkhru 2020 A randomized clinical trial to arrest dentin caries in young children using silver diamine fluoride DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103375 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Mani Prakash 2022 Evaluation of caries arresting potential of silver diamine fluoride and sodium fluoride varnish in primary molars: A randomized controlled… PMID:36861553 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Mijan 2013 The 3.5-year survival rates of primary molars treated according to three treatment protocols: a controlled clinical trial. PMID:23943256 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Quritum 2024 Effectiveness of nanosilver fluoride and silver diamine fluoride in arresting early childhood caries: a randomized controlled clinical… PMID:38890627 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Santamaria 2014 Caries management strategies for primary molars: 1-yr randomized control trial results. PMID:25216660 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Vollú 2019 Efficacy of 30% silver diamine fluoride compared to atraumatic restorative treatment on dentine caries arrestment in primary molars of… DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2019.07.003 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Yu 2004 Survival of glass ionomer restorations placed in primary molars using atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and conventional cavity… PMID:15005472 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Zheng 2023 Caries Prevention Using Silver Diamine Fluoride: A 12-Month Clinical Trial. PMID:36682908 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Zhi 2012 Randomized clinical trial on effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride and glass ionomer in arresting dentine caries in preschool children DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2012.08.002 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Abo Alhuda 2022 Efficacy evaluation of pepsin enzyme-based gel in chemo-mechanical caries removal on primary anterior teeth: a randomized controlled… DOI:10.4322/bds.2022.e3538 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Aly 2022 Potential discolouration of silver diamine fluoride versus silver diamine fluoride/potassium iodide in primary teeth: a randomised… PMID:36473976 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Aly 2023 Survival Analysis and Cost Effectiveness of Silver Modified Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (SMART) and ART Occlusal Restorations in… DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104379 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Aly 2023 Survival Analysis and Cost Effectiveness of Silver Modified Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (SMART) and ART Occlusal Restorations in… PMID:36460236 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Araujo 2020 Atraumatic restorative treatment compared to the Hall Technique for occluso-proximal carious lesions in primary molars; 36-month follow-up… PMID:33176756 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Arrow 2016 Restorative Outcomes of a Minimally Invasive Restorative Approach Based on Atraumatic Restorative Treatment to Manage Early Childhood… DOI:10.1159/000442093 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Arrow 2016 Restorative Outcomes of a Minimally Invasive Restorative Approach Based on Atraumatic Restorative Treatment to Manage Early Childhood… PMID:26667118 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Ayedun 2020 Comparison of the Treatment Assessments of the Conventional Stainless-Steel Crown Restorations and the Hall Technique. PMID:32476119 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Bansal 2023 Silver diamine fluoride modified atraumatic restorative treatment compared to conventional restorative technique on carious primary… DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104698 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Bansal 2023 Silver diamine fluoride modified atraumatic restorative treatment compared to conventional restorative technique on carious primary… PMID:37704105 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Bergmann 2005 Removing dentine caries in deciduous teeth with Carisolv: a randomised, controlled, prospective study with six-month follow-up, comparing… PMID:16173387 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Boyd 2021 A Primary Care Randomized Controlled Trial of Hall and Conventional Restorative Techniques DOI:10.1177/2380084420933154 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Boyd 2021 A Primary Care Randomized Controlled Trial of Hall and Conventional Restorative Techniques. PMID:32559403 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Cleary 2022 A 12-Month Randomized Clinical Trial of 38% SDF vs. Restorative Treatment DOI:10.1177/23800844211072741 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| de Medeiros Serpa 2017 The effect of atraumatic restorative treatment on adhesive restorations for dental caries in deciduous molars DOI:10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_98_16 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| de Medeiros Serpa 2017 The effect of atraumatic restorative treatment on adhesive restorations for dental caries in deciduous molars. PMID:28492197 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| de Sousa 2022 Early childhood caries management using fluoride varnish and neutral fluoride gel: a randomized clinical trial DOI:10.1590/1807-3107bor-2022.vol36.0099 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| de Sousa 2022 matched by author and year (probable) | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Devi 2023 A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating the Effectiveness of Nanosilver Fluoride in Arresting Dental Caries in School Children. PMID:38162244 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Dias 2018 Efficacy of sealing occlusal caries with a flowable composite in primary molars: A 2-year randomized controlled clinical trial DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2018.05.014 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Dias 2018 Efficacy of sealing occlusal caries with a flowable composite in primary molars: A 2-year randomized controlled clinical trial. PMID:29800637 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Dos Santos 2022 Sealing of cavitated occlusal carious lesions in the dentine of deciduous molars: a two-year randomised controlled clinical trial DOI:10.1007/s00784-021-04085-2 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Dos Santos 2022 Sealing of cavitated occlusal carious lesions in the dentine of deciduous molars: a two-year randomised controlled clinical trial. PMID:34286398 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Ebrahimi 2020 Success and Behavior During Atraumatic Restorative Treatment, the Hall Technique, and the Stainless Steel Crown Technique for Primary… PMID:32522320 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Elamin 2019 A randomized clinical trial comparing Hall vs conventional technique in placing preformed metal crowns from Sudan. PMID:31158253 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| ElGhandour 2024 DOI:10.23804/ejpd.2024.2052 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| ElGhandour 2024 Effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride in arresting early childhood caries: a randomised controlled clinical trial. PMID:38888598 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Elhennawy 2021 Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial. PMID:32857210 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Foley 2004 Partial caries removal and cariostatic materials in carious primary molar teeth: a randomised controlled clinical trial DOI:10.1038/sj.bdj.4811865 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Foley 2004 Partial caries removal and cariostatic materials in carious primary molar teeth: a randomised controlled clinical trial. PMID:15592552 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Georgieva-Dimitrova 2019 matched by author and year (probable) | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Hegde 2014 matched by author and year (probable) | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Hilgert 2014 Is high-viscosity glass-ionomer-cement a successor to amalgam for treating primary molars? DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2014.07.010 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Honkala 2003 The atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach to restoring primary teeth in a standard dental clinic DOI:10.1046/j.1365-263x.2003.00455.x | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Innes 2007 The Hall Technique; a randomized controlled clinical trial of a novel method of managing carious primary molars in general dental… PMID:18096042 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Kaptan 2021 Evaluation of Success of Stainless Steel Crowns Placed Using the Hall Technique in Children with High Caries Risk DOI:10.4103/njcp.njcp_112_20 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Kaptan and Korkmaz 2021 Evaluation of success of stainless steel crowns placed using the hall technique in children with high caries risk: A randomized clinical… PMID:33723119 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Kezawie 2021 matched by author and year (probable) | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Kirzioglu 2007 Clinical evaluation of chemomechanical and mechanical caries removal: status of the restorations at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months DOI:10.1007/s00784-006-0072-1 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Kirzioglu 2007 Clinical evaluation of chemomechanical and mechanical caries removal: status of the restorations at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. PMID:16969657 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Liberman 2020 Survival of composite restorations after selective or total caries removal in primary teeth and predictors of failures: A 36-months… PMID:31881241 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Mani Prakash 2022 Evaluation of caries arresting potential of silver diamine fluoride and sodium fluoride varnish in primary molars: A randomized controlled… DOI:10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_239_22 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Marczuk-Kolada 2011 matched by author and year (probable) | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Mijan 2013 The 3.5-year survival rates of primary molars treated according to three treatment protocols: a controlled clinical trial DOI:10.1007/s00784-013-1077-1 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Mohammed 2022 Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Silver-modified Atraumatic Restorative Technique vs Atraumatic Restorative Technique in Primary Teeth:… DOI:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3437 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Mohammed 2022 Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Silver-modified Atraumatic Restorative Technique vs Atraumatic Restorative Technique in Primary Teeth:… PMID:37073938 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Motta 2014 Randomized controlled clinical trial of long-term chemo-mechanical caries removal using Papacarie™ gel. PMID:25141203 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Nagireddy 2019 Nanosilver Fluoride-A Paradigm Shift for Arrest in Dental Caries in Primary Teeth of Schoolchildren: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. PMID:32440060 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Orhan 2008 Pulp exposure occurrence and outcomes after 1- or 2-visit indirect pulp therapy vs complete caries removal in primary and permanent molars. PMID:20836956 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Oz 2023 The clinical success of ART restorations and Hall technique in primary molars: a randomized 18-month follow-up study. PMID:37284348 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Pascareli-Carlos 2023 Survival rate of the Hall technique compared with resin composite restoration in multi-surface cavities in primary teeth: a 1-year… PMID:37820181 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Pereira 2021 Pulp Vitality and Longevity of Adhesive Restorations Are Not Affected by Selective Carious Removal: A Multicenter Clinical Trial DOI:10.1159/000510698 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Pereira 2021 Pulp Vitality and Longevity of Adhesive Restorations Are Not Affected by Selective Carious Removal: A Multicenter Clinical Trial. PMID:33326969 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Phonghanyudh 2012 Clinical evaluation of three caries removal approaches in primary teeth: a randomised controlled trial. PMID:22779380 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Poludasu 2022 Comparison of Three Treatment Techniques for Deep Carious Lesions in Primary Teeth: An In Vivo Study. PMID:35645518 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Salamoon 2021 matched by author and year (probable) | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Santos 2014 A New “Silver-Bullet” to treat caries in children – Nano Silver Fluoride: A randomised clinical trial DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2014.05.017 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Schwendicke 2019 Cost-effectiveness of the Hall Technique in a Randomized Trial DOI:10.1177/0022034518799742 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Schwendicke 2019 Cost-effectiveness of the Hall Technique in a Randomized Trial. PMID:30216734 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Shawki 2023 matched by author and year (probable) | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Taifour 2002 Effectiveness of Glass-Ionomer (ART) and Amalgam Restorations in the Deciduous Dentition: Results after 3 Years DOI:10.1159/000066531 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Thakkar 2022 A Randomized Control Trial of Clinical Success and Acceptability of the Hall Technique and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement… DOI:10.9734/jpri/2022/v34i17b35770 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Therathil 2023 Comparison of Effectiveness of Two Silver Compounds in Arresting Caries in Outreach Programs in Karnataka DOI:10.4103/jiaphd.jiaphd_122_22 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Turton 2021 Caries arrest and lesion appearance using two different silver fluoride therapies on primary teeth with and without potassium iodide:… PMID:33370847 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Undre 2023 Evaluation of the Success of Conventional and Biological Restorative Treatment Approaches for Caries in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study. PMID:37731796 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Vaid 2023 Evaluation of 38% Silver Diamine Fluoride vs High Viscosity Glass Ionomer Cement for Management of Dentinal Caries in Primary Molars DOI:10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2250 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Yu 2004 Survival of glass ionomer restorations placed in primary molars using atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and conventional cavity… DOI:10.1111/j.1875-595x.2004.tb00251.x | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
| Yunus 2021 A comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic… PMID:35003560 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet | not extracted yet |
Overlap with other reviews
Reviews that include the same primary studies are not independent evidence. Shared counts match studies by PMID, DOI or NCT, and otherwise by author and year (a probable match).