n Journal of Minimum Intervention in Dentistry - Failure rate of atraumatic restorative treatment using high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement compared to conventional amalgam restorative treatment in primary and permanent teeth : a systematic review of Chinese trials [protocol]




This protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on the 10 July 2012 under registration number CRD42012002621 (Available online from http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42012002621). This protocol comprises an addition of an existing systematic review report: and provides a quantitative systematic review of the Chinese literature to the topic.

This systematic review seeks to answer the question as to whether, in patients with carious cavities of any class in primary and permanent teeth, ART restorations have a higher failure rate than amalgam restorations placed using conventional rotary instruments in tooth cavities of the same size, type of dentition and followup period?
Databases: Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Chinese Medical Current Content (CMCC), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, formerly China Academic Journals), VIP Information and WanFang Data; searching of reference lists of included articles.
Strings of search terms will be constructed in simplified Chinese. In addition, the English search term "atraumatic restorative treatment" will be used for database search.
Clinical trials (trials on animals, in-situ, in-vitro trials not included); Controlled trials: including control- and test group(s) (1-arm longitudinal trials not included); Trial focus relevant to the review question; Prospective trials (retrospective trials not included).
The information extracted from trials will include general trial information, intervention integrity, methodological quality and bias risk; all data with relevance to the review question will be extracted in form of individual dichotomous and continuous datasets.
A relative point estimate (RR = Risk ratio) will be computed, the results will also be converted into an absolute outcome measure (RD = Risk difference), as well as into an illustrative comparative risk for both, test- and control intervention, and reported accordingly; statistical heterogeneity will be investigated; sensitivity analysis will be applied in order to establish whether all findings are robust to the type of data analysis used; Selection-, detection-, performance-, attrition-, publication- and reporting bias risk in the accepted trials will be assessed; Research gaps within accepted trials in terms of imprecision, inconsistency, lack of right information and shortcomings in bias risk control will be identified using a designated worksheet and subsequently more detailed recommendations for further research will be added to the this systematic review update.


Article metrics loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error