Fissure sealant therapy as a portable community‐based care in deprived regions: Effectiveness of a clinical trial after 1 year follow‐up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the fissure sealant therapy in suboptimal setting (as part of a community-based program using the portable equipment and provided by dental students) on the caries status of school children. This pragmatic split-mouth randomised clinical trial was conducted in rural area of Iran. At baseline, 124 patients, including 185 paired teeth with deep pits and fissures of opposite quadrants that were either healthy or at early stages of enamel decay (International Caries Detection and Assessment System [ICDAS] 0-2), were randomly allocated to receive fissure sealant or acted as control. The incidence of new caries (ICDAS code 3-6) and the sealant's retention status after 1-year follow-up were evaluated. Using chi-square test, the relative risk (RR) and the Number Needed to Treat (NNT) to prevent new caries were calculated. After 1 year, 109 patients including 163 paired teeth were available. Sixty-seven (41.4%) and 44 (27.2%) teeth had complete and partial retained sealants respectively. The risk of caries incidence in non-sealed teeth was almost three times more than sealed teeth (RR = 2.88, 95% CI: 1.4-1.97, p = 0.002) and the NNT was 10 (95% CI: 6-26). A significant association was noted between the status of sealant retention after 1 year and the incidence of new caries (p < 0.001). Fissure sealant as part of a community-based program was effective in controlling caries incidence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".