MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403613595 · doi:10.1186/s13063-024-08559-y

Efficacy of vital pulp therapy for carious pulp injury in permanent teeth: a study protocol for an open-label randomized controlled noninferiority trial

2024· article· en· W4403613595 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qian Zeng, Min Chen, Siyi Zheng, Xi Wei, Hongyan Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicEndodontics and Root Canal Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulp (tooth)DentistryRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)Clinical trialPulp cappingSurgeryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vital pulp therapy (VPT) has recently been reported as an effective approach for preventing and treating carious pulp injury in permanent teeth. Compared with root canal treatment (RCT), which involves complete removal of the pulp tissue, VPT effectively maintains pulp vitality and retains the physiological functions of the pulp. In the research pool, large-scale randomized controlled trials evaluating the treatment outcome of VPT using calcium silicate cements and RCT in cariously exposed permanent teeth are lacking. Here, we present a monocentric clinical protocol to compare the effects of VPT using iRoot BP Plus (Innovative Bioceramix, Vancouver, BC, Canada) as a pulp-capping material with RCT. The proposed trial is an open-label, single-centre, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial. In total, 462 patients will be included in this trial according to the following criteria: adult patients (18–50 years old), pulp exposure during the treatment of deep caries in mature permanent teeth, a diagnosis of reversible or partially irreversible pulpitis without apical translucency on X-ray, without periodontitis or systemic disease. Patients with signed informed consent forms will be enrolled and randomly divided into two groups (VPT and RCT) with a balanced treatment allocation (1:1). Clinical evaluations will be conducted at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after treatment, with the potential for extension. The primary outcome measure will be the duration of success. The secondary outcomes will include the success rate at the 1-year follow-up and any adverse reactions. The Kaplan‒Meier method and log-rank test will be used to compare the duration of success of both treatments. For other outcomes, the χ2 test or Fisher’s exact test will be used for categorical variables, and the t test or Mann‒Whitney U test will be used for continuous variables to assess the differences between groups. The results of this trial will provide a clinical reference for selecting treatments for carious pulp injuries in permanent teeth. ClinicalTrials.gov ChiCTR2100051369. The study has been registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) ( www.chictr.org.cn ). Registered on 21 September 2021

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.200
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicEndodontics and Root Canal TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207