{"text_format":"3","workbook":"xls","n_sheets":3,"sheets":["Sheet1","Sheet2","Sheet3"],"not_rendered":{"images":2},"read":"whole","date_system":"1900","formulas":"cached_only"}

{"sheet":"Sheet1","index":0,"n_rows":475,"n_cols":24,"rows_kept":475,"flags":["formulas_cached_only"]}
["Should evidence from controlled ART trials be excluded from systematic reviews concerning the clinical merits of directly placed posterior restorative materials?"]
[]
["Steffen Mickenautsch, Veerasamy Yengopal "]
["SYSTEM Initiative, Department of Community Dentistry, Faculty of Health Science, University of the Witwatersrand, 7 York Road, 2193 Parktown / Johannesburg, South Africa."]
[]
["List of contents"]
["Section 1: Rules of propositional and predicate logic"]
["Section 2: Search term development and citation inclusion criteria per search question"]
["Section 3: Quality assessment criteria"]
["Section 4: Logical validity assessment "]
["Section 5: Conversion of key assumptions into search questions"]
["Section 6: Excluded articles with reason"]
[]
[]
[]
["Section 1: Rules of propositional and predicate logic"]
[]
["Hypothetical syllogism (HS)"]
[1,"Proposition 1: If A is the case then B is the case."]
[2,"Proposition 2: If B is case then C is the case."]
["-----------------------------------------------------------------------"]
[3,"Conclusion: Therefore, if A is the case then C is necessarily the case."]
[]
["Modus tollens (MT)"]
[1,"Proposition 1: If A is true then B is true."]
[2,"Proposition 2: B is not true."]
["-----------------------------------------------------------------------"]
[3,"Conclusion: Therefore, A is necessarily not true."]
[]
["Modus ponens (MP)"]
[1,"Proposition 1: If A is true then B is true."]
[2,"Proposition 2: A is true."]
["-----------------------------------------------------------------------"]
[3,"Conclusion: Therefore, B is necessarily true."]
[]
["Categorical syllogism"]
[1,"1st Premise: All A belong to B"]
[2,"2nd Premise: C belongs to A"]
["-----------------------------------------------------------------------"]
[3,"Conclusion: Therefore, C necessarily belongs to B."]
[]
["Section 2: Search term development and citation inclusion criteria per search question"]
[]
["1. Search term development"]
["Converted  search question Q1: Do treatment techniques that rely on complete carious tissue excavation using different materials for cavity restorations follow essentially the same treatment steps?"]
["PubMed search – December 28, 2016"]
["(\"Guideline\"[Publication Type] AND \"Practice Guideline\"[Publication Type]) AND \"Dental Restoration, Permanent\"[Mesh] (Time limit: 2013 – 2016)"]
[]
["GoogleScholar - December 28, 2016"]
["\"dental amalgam\"+\"cavity preparation\" (Time limit: 2013 – 2016)"]
[]
["DOAJ search - January 23, 2017"]
["clincial guidelines"]
[]
["Converted  search question Q2: Is incomplete carious tissue removal by hand instrumentation for tooth excavation directly related to the material properties of GIC (HVGIC)?"]
["1. Antibacterial effect of High-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (HVGIC)"]
["PubMed search – December 28, 2016"]
["[1] (\"Glass Ionomer Cements\"[Mesh]) AND \"Dental Restoration, permanent\"[Mesh] AND bacteria "]
["[2] Fuji IX AND bacteria "]
["[3] Ketac Molar AND bacteria "]
["[4] (\"Glass Ionomer Cements\"[Mesh]) AND \"Dental Restoration, Permanent\"[Mesh] AND mutans "]
["[5] (\"Glass Ionomer Cements\"[Mesh]) AND chlorhexidine "]
[]
["DOAJ search - January 23, 2017"]
["glass ionomer AND bacteria"]
[]
["2. Remineralising effect of HVGIC"]
["PubMed search – December 28, 2016"]
["[1] (\"Glass Ionomer Cements\"[Mesh]) AND \"Dental Restoration, Permanent\"[Mesh] AND remineralization "]
["[2] (\"Glass Ionomer Cements\"[Mesh]) AND \"Dental Restoration, Permanent\"[Mesh] AND demineralization "]
["[3] (\"Glass Ionomer Cements\"[Mesh]) AND \"Dental Restoration, Permanent\"[Mesh] AND mineral "]
["[4] glass ionomer AND remineralization AND dentin "]
[]
["DOAJ search - January 23, 2017"]
["glass ionomer AND remineralization AND dentin "]
[]
["Converted  search question Q3: In tooth restorations of the same clinical indication, does incomplete carious tissue removal by tooth excavation using hand instrumentation causes a statistically significant (p < 0.05) "]
["difference in the restoration failure rate when compared to complete carious tissue removal by drilling used during conventional tooth excavation?"]
["PubMed search – December 28, 2016"]
["\"caries removal\" AND (complete OR incomplete) "]
[]
["DOAJ search - January 23, 2017"]
["\"caries removal\" AND (complete OR incomplete) "]
[]
["2. Inclusion criteria per search question"]
["Converted  search question Q1: Do treatment techniques that rely on complete carious tissue excavation using different materials for cavity restorations follow essentially the same treatment steps?"]
["(i)","Treatment guidelines or recommendations for placing conventional posterior tooth restorations using amalgam and composite resin"]
["(ii)","Publication language: English"]
["(iii)","Published recently (within last 3 years of literature search)"]
[]
["Converted  search question Q2: Is incomplete carious tissue removal by hand instrumentation for tooth excavation directly related to the material properties of GIC (HVGIC)?"]
["A. Antibacterial effect of HVGIC"]
["(i)","Systematic review of clinical trials"]
["(ii)","Clinical or Clinical/ex vivo, in-situ and in-vitro prospective controlled trial"]
["(iii)","For Clinical or Clinical/ex vivo, in-situ trials: Comparing HVGIC in test group versus amalgam or composite resin material in control group (Cermets, RMGIC, GIC based sealant or luting materials not included as test materials)"]
["(iv)","For in-vitro trials: Comparing HVGIC in test group versus chlorhexidine or other antibacterial substance, amalgam or composite resin material in control group"]
["(v)","Computable data reported for all intervention groups"]
["(vi)","Trial not included in an identified systematic reviews"]
[]
["B. Remineralising effect of HVGIC"]
["(i)","Systematic review of clinical trials"]
["(ii)","Prospective controlled trial (clinical/ex-vivo, in-situ, in-vitro)"]
["(iii)","Clinical/ex-vivo trials comparing HVGIC versus non-fluoride releasing composite or amalgam placed adjacent to demineralised tooth tissue "]
["(iv)","In-vitro, in-situ trials comparing HVGIC versus non-fluoride releasing composite or amalgam placed adjacent to demineralised tooth tissue"]
["(v)","Computable data reported for all intervention groups"]
["(vi)","Trial not included in an identified systematic reviews"]
[]
["Converted  search question Q3: In tooth restorations of the same clinical indication, does incomplete carious tissue removal by tooth excavation using hand instrumentation causes a statistically significant (p < 0.05) "]
["difference in the restoration failure rate when compared to complete carious tissue removal by drilling used during conventional tooth excavation?"]
["(i)","Systematic review of clinical trials"]
["(ii)","Prospective controlled trial "]
["(iii)","Clinical trial comparing incomplete versus complete caries excavation "]
["(iv)","Outcome measure: restoration failure"]
["(v)","Computable data reported for all intervention groups"]
["(vi)","Trial not included in an identified systematic reviews"]
[]
[]
[]
["Section 3: Quality assessment criteria"]
[]
["[1] Clinical guidelines / AGREE II tool"]
[]
["DOMAIN 1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE",null,"DOMAIN 4. CLARITY OF PRESENTATION"]
["1. The overall objective(s) of the guideline is (are) specifically described.",null,"15. The recommendations are specific and unambiguous."]
["2. The health question(s) covered by the guideline is (are) specifically described.",null,"16. The different options for management of the condition or health issue are clearly presented."]
["3. The population (patients, public, etc.) to whom the guideline is meant to apply is specifically described.",null,"17. Key recommendations are easily identifiable."]
[]
["DOMAIN 2. STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT",null,"DOMAIN 5. APPLICABILITY"]
["4. The guideline development group includes individuals from all relevant professional groups.",null,"18. The guideline describes facilitators and barriers to its application."]
["5. The views and preferences of the target population (patients, public, etc.) have been sought.",null,"19. The guideline provides advice and/or tools on how the recommendations can be put into practice."]
["6. The target users of the guideline are clearly defined.",null,"20. The potential resource implications of applying the recommendations have been considered."]
[null,null,"21. The guideline presents monitoring and/or auditing criteria."]
["DOMAIN 3. RIGOUR OF DEVELOPMENT"]
["7. Systematic methods were used to search for evidence.",null,"DOMAIN 6. EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE"]
["8. The criteria for selecting the evidence are clearly described.",null,"22. The views of the funding body have not influenced the content of the guideline."]
["9. The strengths and limitations of the body of evidence are clearly described.",null,"23. Competing interests of guideline development group members have been recorded and addressed."]
["10. The methods for formulating the recommendations are clearly described."]
["11. The health benefits, side effects, and risks have been considered in formulating the recommendations."]
["12. There is an explicit link between the recommendations and the supporting evidence.",null,"Eeach item was assesed on a scale of 1-7 with 1 = \"Strongly Disagree\" and 7 = \"Strongly Agree\"."]
["13. The guideline has been externally reviewed by experts prior to its publication."]
["14. A procedure for updating the guideline is provided."]
[]
["Quality/Internal validity assessment"]
[]
["Q1: Do treatment techniques that rely on complete carious tissue excavation using different materials for cavity restorations follow essentially the same treatment steps?"]
[]
["Assessment criteria"]
["Assessment results"]
[{"$nulls":4},"Amalgam restorations",{"$nulls":7},"Composite restorations"]
["Domain 1","Scope and purpose",null,"Item",1,2,3,{"$nulls":5},"Item",1,2,3]
[{"$nulls":4},7,7,1,{"$nulls":6},7,7,1]
[]
["Domain 2","Stakeholder involvement",null,"Item",4,5,6,{"$nulls":5},"Item",4,5,6]
[{"$nulls":4},5,1,3,{"$nulls":6},5,1,3]
[]
["Domain 3","Rigor of development",null,"Item",7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,"Item",7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14]
[{"$nulls":4},1,1,1,1,7,6,4,7,null,1,1,1,1,7,7,4,7]
[]
["Domain 4","Clarity and presentation",null,"Item",15,16,17,{"$nulls":5},"Item",15,16,17]
[{"$nulls":4},7,6,5,{"$nulls":6},6,7,4]
[]
["Domain 5 Applicability",null,null,"Item",18,19,20,21,{"$nulls":4},"Item",18,19,20,21]
[{"$nulls":4},2,1,1,1,{"$nulls":5},2,1,1,1]
[]
["Domain 6 Editorial independence",null,null,"Item",22,23," ",{"$nulls":5},"Item",22,23," "]
[{"$nulls":4},5,4,{"$nulls":7},5,4]
[{"$nulls":4},"Domain","O",null,"Min","Max","DS","%"]
[{"$nulls":5},"AM","COM",null,null,"AM","COM",null,"Min","Minimum possible score",{"$nulls":5},"DS% - Calculation:"]
[{"$nulls":4},1,15,15,3,21,66,66,null,"Max ","Maximum possible score"]
[{"$nulls":4},2,9,9,3,21,33,33,null,"O","Obtained score",{"$nulls":5},"DS% =   (O - Min) / (Max - Min)"]
[{"$nulls":4},3,28,29,8,56,42,44,null,"DS%","Domain score"]
[{"$nulls":4},4,18,17,3,21,83,78,null,"AM","Amalgam"]
[{"$nulls":4},5,5,5,4,28,4,4,null,"COM","Composite resin"]
[{"$nulls":4},6,9,9,2,14,58,58]
[]
["[2] Systematic review reports / AMSTAR tool",null,"Systematic review"]
[null,null,"Ricketts et al., 2013","Schwendicke et al., 2013"]
["1. Was an 'a priori' design provided?",null,"Can't answer","No"]
["The research question and inclusion criteria should be established before the conduct of"]
["the review."]
["Note: Need to refer to a protocol, ethics approval, or pre-determined/a priori published"]
["research objectives to score a “yes.”"]
[]
["2. Was there duplicate study selection and data extraction?",null,"Yes","Yes"]
["There should be at least two independent data extractors and a consensus procedure for"]
["disagreements should be in place."]
["Note: 2 people do study selection, 2 people do data extraction, consensus process or one"]
["person checks the other’s work."]
[]
["3. Was a comprehensive literature search performed?",null,"Yes","Yes"]
["At least two electronic sources should be searched. The report must include years and"]
["databases used (e.g., Central, EMBASE, and MEDLINE). Key words and/or MESH terms"]
["must be stated and where feasible the search strategy should be provided. All searches"]
["should be supplemented by consulting current contents, reviews, textbooks, specialized"]
["registers, or experts in the particular field of study, and by reviewing the references in"]
["the studies found."]
["Note: If at least 2 sources + one supplementary strategy used, select “yes” (Cochrane"]
["register/Central counts as 2 sources; a grey literature search counts as supplementary)."]
[]
["4. Was the status of publication (i.e. grey literature) used as an inclusion",null,"No","No"]
["criterion?"]
["The authors should state that they searched for reports regardless of their publication"]
["type. The authors should state whether or not they excluded any reports (from the"]
["systematic review), based on their publication status, language etc."]
["Note: If review indicates that there was a search for “grey literature” or “unpublished"]
["literature,” indicate “yes.” SIGLE database, dissertations, conference proceedings, and"]
["trial registries are all considered grey for this purpose. If searching a source that contains"]
["both grey and non-grey, must specify that they were searching for grey/unpublished lit."]
[]
["5. Was a list of studies (included and excluded) provided?",null,"Yes","Yes"]
["A list of included and excluded studies should be provided."]
["Note: Acceptable if the excluded studies are referenced. If there is an electronic link to"]
["the list but the link is dead, select “no.”"]
[]
["6. Were the characteristics of the included studies provided?",null,"Yes","Yes"]
["In an aggregated form such as a table, data from the original studies should be provided"]
["on the participants, interventions and outcomes. The ranges of characteristics in all the"]
["studies analyzed e.g., age, race, sex, relevant socioeconomic data, disease status,"]
["duration, severity, or other diseases should be reported."]
["Note: Acceptable if not in table format as long as they are described as above."]
[]
["7. Was the scientific quality of the included studies assessed and documented?",null,"Yes","Yes"]
["'A priori' methods of assessment should be provided (e.g., for effectiveness studies if the"]
["author(s) chose to include only randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled studies, or"]
["allocation concealment as inclusion criteria); for other types of studies alternative items"]
["will be relevant."]
["Note: Can include use of a quality scoring tool or checklist, e.g., Jadad scale, risk of bias,"]
["sensitivity analysis, etc., or a description of quality items, with some kind of result for"]
["EACH study (“low” or “high” is fine, as long as it is clear which studies scored “low” and"]
["which scored “high”; a summary score/range for all studies is not acceptable)."]
[]
["8. Was the scientific quality of the included studies used appropriately in",null,"Yes","Yes"]
["formulating conclusions?"]
["The results of the methodological rigor and scientific quality should be considered in the"]
["analysis and the conclusions of the review, and explicitly stated in formulating"]
["recommendations."]
["Note: Might say something such as “the results should be interpreted with caution due to"]
["poor quality of included studies.” Cannot score “yes” for this question if scored “no” for"]
["question 7."]
[]
["9. Were the methods used to combine the findings of studies appropriate?",null,"Yes","Yes"]
["For the pooled results, a test should be done to ensure the studies were combinable, to"]
["assess their homogeneity (i.e., Chi-squared test for homogeneity, I2). If heterogeneity"]
["exists a random effects model should be used and/or the clinical appropriateness of"]
["combining should be taken into consideration (i.e., is it sensible to combine?)."]
["Note: Indicate “yes” if they mention or describe heterogeneity, i.e., if they explain that"]
["they cannot pool because of heterogeneity/variability between interventions."]
[]
["10. Was the likelihood of publication bias assessed?",null,"No","Yes"]
["An assessment of publication bias should include a combination of graphical aids (e.g.,"]
["funnel plot, other available tests) and/or statistical tests (e.g., Egger regression test,"]
["Hedges-Olken)."]
["Note: If no test values or funnel plot included, score “no”. Score “yes” if mentions that"]
["publication bias could not be assessed because there were fewer than 10 included"]
["studies."]
[]
["11. Was the conflict of interest included?",null,"Yes","Can't answer"]
["Potential sources of support should be clearly acknowledged in both the systematic"]
["review and the included studies."]
["Note: To get a “yes,” must indicate source of funding or support for the systematic"]
["review AND for each of the included studies."]
[]
["Shea et al. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2007 7:10 doi:10.1186/1471-2288-7-10"]
["Additional notes (in italics) made by Michelle Weir, Julia Worswick, and Carolyn Wayne based on conversations with"]
["Bev Shea and/or Jeremy Grimshaw in June and October 2008 and July and September 2010."]
[]
[]
["[3] Trial report assessment"]
[]
["1.  Assessment criteria for selection bias risk"]
[{"$nulls":5},"Score"]
["Criteria",{"$nulls":4},0,"D","C","B","A"]
["Adequate random sequence generation method reported1",{"$nulls":4},"N","Y","Y","Y","Y"]
["Method of concealing the generated random sequence is reported that is adequate to:"]
[null,"Prevent its direct observation2",{"$nulls":3},"N","N","Y","Y","Y"]
[null,"Prevent its correct prediction3",{"$nulls":3},"N","N","N","Y","Y"]
["Evidence is given in some form of statistical test result that indicates the allocated random sequence was "]
["adhered to throughout the trial4",{"$nulls":4},"N","N","N","N","Y"]
[{"$nulls":4},"Conclusion","NA",{"$nulls":3},"A"]
[]
["A = Adequate randomisation; NA = Not adequate randomisation; N = Information not provided in the trial report; Y = Information provided in the trial report."]
[]
["1 The following methods are considered as inadequate:  cluster randomisation, fixed block randomisation with block size 2, minimization, alternation, randomisation of teeth, use of date of birth or patient record number, “quasi”-randomisation, split-mouth, generation of the random sequence before patient recruitment. "]
["2 Central randomisation or sequence allocation by other than the operator(s) who apply the allocated intervention and who informs the operator(s) which (test- or control) intervention has been allocated to a particular patient only at moment of start of intervention (e.g. by phone), are considered to be adequate. "]
["3 Use of the Maximal randomisation procedure is considered to be adequate. "]
["1-3 Fulfilment of these criteria indicates adequate attempt of effective randomisation but not that the attempt was indeed successful. "]
["4 Any statistical test that includes the use of the Reverse Propensity Score (RPS) is considered to be adequate. Fulfilment of this criterion indicates that the attempt of effective randomisation was indeed successful, i.e. sufficient proof of low selection bias risk."]
[]
[]
["2. Assessment criteria for detection- and performance bias risk"]
[{"$nulls":5},"Score"]
["Criteria",{"$nulls":4},0,"C","B","A"]
["Adequate method of masking/blinding of patients and clinicians and evaluators reported1",{"$nulls":4},"N","Y","Y","Y"]
["No reasons for doubt discerned from the report text that masking/blinding was not successful",{"$nulls":4},"N","N","Y","Y"]
["Evidence is given in some form of applied test* result that shows the masking/blinding was successful "]
["throughout the trial2",{"$nulls":4},"N","N","N","Y"]
[{"$nulls":4},"Conclusion","NA",null,null,"A"]
[]
["A = Adequate masking/blinding; NA = Not adequate masking/blinding; N = Information not provided in the trial report; "]
["Y = Information provided in the trial report."]
[]
["1 Fulfilment of this criterion indicates adequate attempt of effective masking/blinding of effective masking/blinding but not that the attempt was indeed successful. "]
["2 Fulfilment of this criterion indicates that the attempt of effective masking/blinding was indeed successful, i.e. proof of lack of detection/performance bias"]
["* E.g. Application of a questionnaire during the trial that assesses beliefs, as to which test- or control intervention was given/received to/by a particular trial participant, followed by statistical comparison of the questionnaire results with the true allocation sequence. A non-significant result (alpha set at 5%) should sufficiently indicate successful attempt of masking/blinding and subsequent low detection- and performance bias risk."]
[]
[]
[]
["Section 4: Logical validity assessment of the argument:"]
["\"All RCTs that compare GIC restorations placed using ART with other directly placed restorative materials are trials that should be excluded from systematic reviews.\""]
[]
["1. Assessment of the key-assumptions (A1-3) to premise (P2) relationship (Propositional logic)"]
{"$rows_empty":59}
["2. Assessment of the premise (P2) to argument conlusion relationship by categorical syllogism (Predicate logic)"]
[]
["Propositions",{"$nulls":19},"Proposition Type",null,"Logical operator","Syllogism Part"]
["1. Propositions related to general research methodology"]
["P1","All RCT that contain a confounder (RC) are trials that do not ascertain the correct association of the outcome variable with the measured outcome (T).",{"$nulls":19},"A","A (RC, T)"]
["MP1","All RCT that that cannot ascertain the correct association of the outcome variable with the measured outcome (T) are trials that should be excluded from systematic reviews (Ex).",{"$nulls":19},"A","A (T, Ex)"]
[]
["2. Propositions related specific to ART (from key-assumptions - see Section above)"]
["P2","All RCTs that compare GIC restorations placed using ART with other directly placed restorative materials are RCTs that contain a confounder (RC).",{"$nulls":19},"A","A (G, RC)"]
[]
["3. Categorical Syllogism CS 1"]
["P1","All RCT that contain a confounder (RC) are trials that do not ascertain the correct association of the outcome variable with the measured outcome (T).",{"$nulls":19},"A","A (RC, T)","1st Premise"]
["P2","All RCTs that compare GIC restorations placed using ART with other directly placed restorative materials (G) are RCTs that contain a confounder (RC).",{"$nulls":19},"A","A (G, RC)","2nd Premise"]
["MP2","All RCTs that compare GIC restorations placed using ART with other directly placed restorative materials (G) are trials that do not ascertain the correct "]
[null,"association of the outcome variable with the measured outcome (T).",{"$nulls":19},"A","A (G, T)","Conclusion"]
[]
["4. Categorical Syllogism CS 2"]
["MP1","All RCT that that cannot ascertain the correct association of the outcome variable with the measured outcome (T) are trials that should be excluded from systematic reviews (Ex).",{"$nulls":19},"A","A (T, Ex)","1st Premise"]
["MP2","All RCTs that compare GIC restorations placed using ART with other directly placed restorative materials (G) are trials that do not ascertain the correct "]
[null,"association of the outcome variable with the measured outcome (T).",{"$nulls":19},"A","A (G, T)","2nd Premise"]
["C","All RCTs that compare GIC restorations placed using ART with other directly placed restorative materials (G) are trials that should be excluded from systematic reviews (Ex).",{"$nulls":19},"A","A (G, Ex)","Conclusion"]
[]
["5. Proof of syllogism validity",{"$nulls":20},"CS 1","CS 2"]
["Proposition terms"]
["Major term",{"$nulls":20},"T","Ex"]
["Minor term",{"$nulls":20},"G","G"]
["Middle term",{"$nulls":20},"RC","T"]
["Validity conditions [21]"]
["[1] At least one of the premises is affirmative ",{"$nulls":20},"Yes","Yes"]
["[2] If a term is distributed in the conclusion, it must also be distributed in the premise",{"$nulls":20},"Yes","Yes"]
["[3] The middle terms must be distributed in at least one of the premises",{"$nulls":20},"Yes","Yes"]
[]
["A = Universal affirmative proposition type; RCT = Randomised controlled trial; P = Premise; MP = Main premise; C = Conclusion; ART = Atraumatic Restorative Treatment; GIC = Glass-ionomer cement."]
[]
[]
["Section 5: Conversion of key assumptions into search questions"]
[]
["Key-assumption A1: If restorative treatments with different materials use complete carious tissue removal by drilling as excavation technique then these treatments are homogenous."]
[]
["Terms:","Treatment steps*","Restorative material 1","Restorative material 2","Differences"]
[]
["Converted  search question Q1: Do treatment techniques that rely on complete carious tissue excavation using different materials for cavity restorations follow essentially the same treatment steps?"]
["*Per manufacturers instructions and/or clinical guidelines"]
[]
["Key-assumption A2: Incomplete carious tissue removal by hand instrumentation for tooth excavation is not directly associated with the material properties of GIC (HVGIC)."]
[]
["Terms:","Glass-ionomer cement","Material properties","Incomplete carious tissue ","Association"]
[{"$nulls":3},"removal by hand instrumentation"]
[]
["Converted  search question Q2: Is incomplete carious tissue removal by hand instrumentation for tooth excavation directly related to the material properties of GIC (HVGIC)?"]
[]
["Key-assumption A3: Incomplete carious tissue removal by tooth excavation using hand instrumentation causes a statistically significant (p < 0.05) "]
["difference in the restoration failure rate when compared to complete carious tissue removal by drilling used during conventional tooth excavation when placing tooth restorations with e.g. amalgam or resin composite."]
[]
["Terms:","Incomplete carious ","Complete carious ","Restoration failure"]
[null,"tissue removal","tissue removal"]
[]
["Converted  search question Q3: In tooth restorations of the same clinical indication, does incomplete carious tissue removal by tooth excavation using hand instrumentation causes a statistically significant (p < 0.05) "]
["difference in the restoration failure rate when compared to complete carious tissue removal by drilling used during conventional tooth excavation?"]
[]
[]
["Section 6: Excluded articles with reason"]
["Search"]
["question","Reason for exclusion","Article excluded"," "]
["Q2A","Systematic reviews did not include trials with HVGIC in test group","Wiegand A, Buchalla W, Attin T. Review on fluoride-releasing restorative materials--fluoride release and uptake characteristics, antibacterial activity and influence on caries formation. Dent Mater 2007;23:343-362. "]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group; no amalgam or composite resin used in control group","Foley J, Blackwell A. In vivo cariostatic effect of black copper cement on carious dentine. Caries Res 2003;37:254-260.."]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group","Tegginmani VS, Goel B, Uppin V, Horatti P, Kumar LS, Nainani A. Comparison of  antibacterial activity of glass-ionomer cement and amalgam in class two restorations by Streptococcus mutans count analysis at fixed intervals: an in vivo study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14:381-386."]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group","Paolantonio M, D'ercole S, Perinetti G, Tripodi D, Catamo G, Serra E, Bruè C, Piccolomini R. Clinical and microbiological effects of different restorative materials on the periodontal tissues adjacent to subgingival class V restorations. J Clin Periodontol 2004;31:200-207."]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group","Ertuğrul F, Eltem R, Eronat C. A comparative study of plaque mutans streptococci levels in children receiving glass ionomer cement and amalgam restorations. J Dent Child (Chic) 2003;70:10-14."]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group","Lai GY, Zhu LK, Li MY, Wang J. An in vitro study on the secondary caries-prevention properties of three restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 2013;110:363-368."]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group","van Dijken J, Persson S, Sjöström S. Presence of Streptococcus mutans and lactobacilli in saliva and on enamel, glass ionomer cement, and composite resin surfaces. Scand J Dent Res 1991;99:13-19."]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group","Yamamoto K, Arai K, Fukazawa K, Fukui K, Nagamatsu K, Kato K, Nakagaki H, Robinson C. Effect of plaque fluoride released from a glass-ionomer cement onenamel remineralization in situ. Caries Res 2005;39:157-160."]
[null,"No computable data reported (N, mean values, SD per group)","Padovani GC, Fùcio SB, Ambrosano GM, Correr-Sobrinho L, Puppin-Rontani RM. In  situ bacterial accumulation on dental restorative materials. CLSM/COMSTAT analysis. Am J Dent 2015;28:3-8."]
[null,"No computable data reported (mean values, SD per group)","Boeckh C, Schumacher E, Podbielski A, Haller B. Antibacterial activity of restorative dental biomaterials in vitro. Caries Res 2002;36:101-107."]
[null,"No computable data reported (mean values, SD per group)","Auschill TM, Arweiler NB, Brecx M, Reich E, Sculean A, Netuschil L. The effect of dental restorative materials on dental biofilm. Eur J Oral Sci 2002;110:48-53."]
[null,"No computable data reported (mean values, SD per group)","Davidovich E, Weiss E, Fuks AB, Beyth N. Surface antibacterial properties of glass ionomer cements used in atraumatic restorative treatment. J Am Dent Assoc 2007;138:1347-52."]
[null,"No computable data reported (SD per group)","da Silva RC, Zuanon AC, Spolidorio DM, Campos JA. Antibacterial activity of four glass ionomer cements used in atraumatic restorative treatment.J Mater Sci: Mater Med 2007;18:1859–1862"]
[null,"No computable data reported (N, mean values, SD per group)","Brambilla E, Cagetti MG, Gagliani M, Fadini L, García-Godoy F, Strohmenger L. Influence of different adhesive restorative materials on mutans streptococci colonization. Am J Dent 2005;18:173-176."]
["Q2B","Article not traced in full","Ferreira L, Pedrini D, Okamoto AC, Jardim Júnior EG, Henriques TA, Cannon M, Delbem AC. Biochemical and microbiological characteristics of in situ biofilm formed on materials containing fluoride or amorphous calcium phosphate. Am J Dent 2013;26:207-213."]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group","Lai GY, Zhu LK, Li MY, Wang J. An in vitro study on the secondary caries-prevention properties of three restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 2013;110:363-368."]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group","Shiiya T, Mukai Y, Ten Cate JM, Teranaka T. The caries-reducing benefit of fluoride-release from dental restorative materials continues after fluoride-release has ended. Acta Odontol Scand 2012;70:15-20."]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group","Hara AT, Turssi CP, Ando M, González-Cabezas C, Zero DT, Rodrigues AL Jr, Serra MC, Cury JA. Influence of fluoride-releasing restorative material on rootdentine secondary caries in situ. Caries Res 2006;40:435-439."]
[null,"No HVGIC used in test group","Papagiannoulis L, Kakaboura A, Eliades G. In vivo vs in vitro anticariogenic behavior of glass-ionomer and resin composite restorative materials. Dent Mater 2002;18:561-569."]
[null,"No computable data reported (mean values, SD per group)","ten Cate JM, van Duinen RN. Hypermineralization of dentinal lesions adjacent to glass-ionomer cement restorations. J Dent Res 1995;74:1266-1271."]
[null,"No computable data reported (SD per group)","Paradella TC, Koga-Ito CY, Jorge AO. Ability of different restorative materials to prevent in situ secondary caries: analysis by polarized light-microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray. Eur J Oral Sci 2008;116:375-380."]
[null,"No computable data reported (mean values, SD per group)","Aykut-Yetkiner A, Simşek D, Eronat C, Ciftçioğlu M. Comparison of the remineralisation effect of a glass ionomer cement versus a resin composite on dentin of primary teeth. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2014;15:119-121."]
[null,"Fluoride containing composite resin used in control group","Kielbassa AM, Schulte-Monting J, Garcia-Godoy F, Meyer-Lueckel H. Initial in situ secondary caries formation: effect of various fluoride-containing restorative materials. Oper Dent 2003;28:765-72."]
[null,"Fluoride containing composite resin used in control group","Kielbassa AM, Müller U, García-Godoy F. In situ study on the caries-preventive effects of fluoride-releasing materials. Am J Dent 1999;12 Spec No:S13-14."]
[null,"No demineralisation of tooth tissue prior material placement","Sousa RP, Zanin IC, Lima JP, Vasconcelos SM, Melo MA, Beltrão HC, Rodrigues LK. In situ effects of restorative materials on dental biofilm and enamel demineralisation. J Dent 2009;37:44-51."]
[null,"No demineralisation of tooth tissue prior material placement","Kirsten GA, Rached RN, Mazur RF, Vieira S, Souza EM. Effect of open-sandwich vs. adhesive restorative techniques on enamel and dentine demineralization: an insitu study. J Dent 2013;41:872-880."]
[null,"No demineralisation of tooth tissue prior material placement","Kirsten GA, Takahashi MK, Rached RN, Giannini M, Souza EM. Microhardness of dentin underneath fluoride-releasing adhesive systems subjected to cariogenicchallenge and fluoride therapy. J Dent 2010;38:460-468."]
[null,"Fissure sealant material used in control group","Amaral MT, Guedes-Pinto AC, Chevitarese O. Effects of a glass-ionomer cement on the remineralization of occlusal caries--an in situ study. Braz Oral Res 2006;20:91-96."]
[null,"No amalgam or composite resin used in control group","Kuhn E, Chibinski AC, Reis A, Wambier DS. The role of glass ionomer cement on  the remineralization of infected dentin: an in vivo study. Pediatr Dent 2014;36:E118-124."]
[null,"Article not traced in full","Yamamoto Y. [An in vivo study of the remineralization of carious inner dentin. The remineralization effect of glass ionomer cements]. Tsurumi Shigaku 1984;10:57-74. Japanese."]
[null,"Article not traced in full","Rendjova V, Apostolska S, Gjorgoski I. The effect of various dental filling materials on artificially demineralized dentin. Prilozi 2012;33:279-287."]
[null,"Article not traced in full","van Duinen RN, van Strijp AJ, ten Cate JM. [Dentin remineralization induced by glass ionomers]. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd 1992;99:187-189. Dutch."]
["Q3","No computable data reported (N, LTF per group unclear)","Franzon R, Opdam NJ, Guimarães LF, Demarco FF, Casagrande L, Haas AN, Araujo FB. Randomized controlled clinical trial of the 24-months survival of composite resin restorations after one-step incomplete and complete excavation on primary teeth. J Dent 2015;43:1235-1241."]
[null,"Subgroup analysis of trial Franzon et al., 2015","Franzon R, Guimarães LF, Magalhães CE, Haas AN, Araujo FB. Outcomes of one-step incomplete and complete excavation in primary teeth: a 24-monthrandomized controlled trial. Caries Res 2014;48:376-383."]
[null,"Not relevant to review question","Schwendicke F, Meyer-Lueckel H, Dörfer C, Paris S. Failure of incompletely excavated teeth--a systematic review. J Dent 2013;4:569-580."]
[null,"Trial included in accepted systematic review by Ricketts et al., 2013","Phonghanyudh A, Phantumvanit P, Songpaisan Y, Petersen PE. Clinical evaluation of three caries removal approaches in primary teeth: a randomised controlledtrial. Community Dent Health 2012;29:173-178."]
[null,"Trial included in accepted systematic review by Schwendicke et al., 2013","Foley J, Evans D, Blackwell A. Partial caries removal and cariostatic materials in carious primary molar teeth: a randomised controlled clinical trial. Br Dent J 2004;197:697-701."]
["HVGIC = High-viscosity glass-ionomer cement recommended for Atraumatic restorative treatment; N = Number of evaluated units; LTF = Units lost to follow up; SD = Standard deviation."]
["Q2A: Do treatment techniques that rely on complete carious tissue excavation using different materials for cavity restorations follow essentially the same treatment steps?: Antibacterial effect of High-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (HVGIC)"]
["Q2B: Do treatment techniques that rely on complete carious tissue excavation using different materials for cavity restorations follow essentially the same treatment steps?: 2. Remineralising effect of HVGIC"]
["Q3: Converted  search question Q3: In tooth restorations of the same clinical indication, does incomplete carious tissue removal by tooth excavation using hand instrumentation causes a statistically significant (p < 0.05) difference in the restoration failure rate when compared to complete carious tissue removal by drilling used during conventional tooth excavation?"]

{"sheet":"Sheet2","index":1,"n_rows":0,"n_cols":0,"rows_kept":0,"flags":["formulas_cached_only"]}

{"sheet":"Sheet3","index":2,"n_rows":0,"n_cols":0,"rows_kept":0,"flags":["formulas_cached_only"]}