Primary study · included by 1 review

Ertugrul et al. 2010

ProbableThe reviews cited this study without a PMID, DOI or NCT, so it is matched by first author and year. Two different studies by the same author in the same year could be merged here.

Trial PICO

Not extracted yet. Trial-level population, intervention, comparator, outcomes and design will appear here after the trial extraction run. Until then, the reviews below describe the study.

Results

Not extracted yet. Per-trial results (events, means, effect and weight as each review's forest plot reports them) will appear here after the trial extraction run.

Included by

Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious primary teeth without pulp therapy: a systematic review.

Non-Cochrane · intervention · 2022 · cited as Ertugrul et al. 2010 · Tables 3 and 4

Outcome this study informs	Pooled effect	Evidence	Certainty
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) Composite resin with a beveled cavity margin vs Composite resin with no bevel (butt-joint margin) · 18 months (Oliveira 2008)	Annual failure rate (%) bevel 1.8%; no bevel 3.5%	1 study · 32 participants	Ungraded
Restoration failure Conventional compomer vs Colored compomer · 1 year	Annual failure rate (%) Compoglass F 4.3%; Twinky Star 7.0%	1 study · 98 participants	Ungraded

1 including review in total.