Conclusion The current evidence suggests lack of support for the hypothesis that high-viscosity glass-ionomer cements are inferior to silver amalgam as restorative material s for permanent posterior teeth .
Background To develop a synthesis within a Bayesian probability framework of previously established evidence , in order to derive an overall conclusion about the hypothesis ( H1 ) : ‘ High-viscosity glass-ionomer cements ( HVGIC ) are inferior to silver amalgam as ( load bearing ) restorative material s for permanent posterior teeth ’ .
Research gaps identified during systematic reviews of clinical trials: glass-ionomer cements
Background To report the results of an audit concerning research gaps in clinical trials that were accepted for appraisal in authored and published systematic review s regarding the application of glass-ionomer cements ( GIC ) in dental practice Methods Information concerning research gaps in trial precision was extracted , following a framework that included classification of the research gap reasons : ‘ imprecision of information ( results ) ’ , ‘ biased information ’ , ‘ inconsistency or unknown consistency ’ and ‘ not the right information ’ , as well as research gap characterization using PICOS elements : population ( P ) , intervention ( I ) , comparison ( C ) , outcomes ( O ) and setting ( S ) . Internal trial validity assessment was based on the underst and ing that successful control for systematic error can not be assured on the basis of inclusion of adequate methods alone , but also requires empirical evidence about whether such attempt was successful . Results A comprehensive and interconnected coverage of GIC-related clinical topics was established . The most common reasons found for gaps in trial precision were lack of sufficient trials and lack of sufficient large sample size . Only a few research gaps were ascribed to ‘ Lack of information ’ caused by focus on mainly surrogate trial outcomes . According to the chosen assessment criteria , a lack of adequate r and omisation , allocation concealment and blinding/masking in trials covering all review ed GIC topics was noted ( selection - and detection/performance bias risk ) . Trial results appear to be less affected by loss-to-follow-up ( attrition bias risk ) . Conclusion This audit represents an adjunct of the systematic review articles it has covered . Its results do not change the systematic review ’s conclusions but highlight existing research gaps concerning the precision and internal validity of review ed trials in detail . These gaps should be addressed in future GIC-related clinical research
Conclusion The current evidence suggests lack of support for the hypothesis that high-viscosity glass-ionomer cements are inferior to silver amalgam as restorative material s for permanent posterior teeth .
Background To develop a synthesis within a Bayesian probability framework of previously established evidence , in order to derive an overall conclusion about the hypothesis ( H1 ) : ‘ High-viscosity glass-ionomer cements ( HVGIC ) are inferior to silver amalgam as ( load bearing ) restorative material s for permanent posterior teeth ’ .