Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40954445›Full record

Trial reportEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry2026

Sealant retention, patient satisfaction, and operator preference: a split-mouth randomised controlled trial comparing EasyPrep

W Kornkrasunk, C Manmontri, P Chompu-Inwai, A Nirunsittirat, W Tangtrakooljaroen, B Thiangjai, P Boonphirom, S Arjitpunyo, N Chaipattanawan

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

W KornkrasunkDivision of Pediatric Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
C ManmontriDivision of Pediatric Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
P Chompu-InwaiDivision of Pediatric Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
A NirunsittiratDivision of Community Dentistry, Department of Family and Community Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
W TangtrakooljaroenDivision of Pediatric Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
B ThiangjaiDivision of Pediatric Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
P BoonphiromDivision of Pediatric Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
S ArjitpunyoDivision of Pediatric Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
N ChaipattanawanDivision of Pediatric Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand. nattakan.chai@cmu.ac.th.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare sealant retention, patient satisfaction, and operator preference between EasyPrep

methodsThis university-based, superiority, split-mouth randomised controlled trial enrolled 92 children aged 6-12 years with matched contralateral pairs of maxillary or mandibular permanent first molars (PFMs). Each participant was randomised to receive sealants using either EasyPrep

resultsOf the 180 pairs of PFMs included at baseline, 155 and 110 were evaluated at the 6- and 12-month follow-ups, respectively. The relative risks of sealant retention success with EasyPrep

conclusionAlthough most operators preferred EasyPrep

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionPit and Fissure SealantsChildCotton FiberDental CariesFemaleHumansMaleSchools, DentalPit and Fissure SealantsCotton rollEasyPrep®Randomised controlled trialSatisfactionSealant retention

Identifiers

PMID40954445

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.