Table 4.
Indirect treatment comparison (ITC) results.
| 1. Single dataset results | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First author | Journal | Year | Vol. | First page | DS | OR | 95%CI |
| (a) Composite resin versus amalgam restorations | |||||||
| Sachdeo [31] | EurJProsthodont RestDent | 2004 | 12 | 15 | CA01 | 1.39 | 0.027 - 72.5 |
| Soncini [30] | JADA | 2007 | 138 | 763 | CA02 | 1.95 | 1.26 - 3.01 |
| Bernado [2] | JADA | 2007 | 138 | 775 | CA04 | 2.47 | 1.42 - 4.31 |
| (b) HVGIC versus amalgam restorations | |||||||
| Li [27] | PractClinMed | 2005 | 6 | 105 | GA02 | 1.52 | 0.80 - 2.90 |
| Frencken [28] | JDR | 2006 | 85 | 622 | GA07 | 1.13 | 0.36 - 3.55 |
| GA10 | 0.13 | 0.03 - 0.53 | |||||
| Estupiñán-Day [29] | PAHO-report/Ecuador | 2006 | GA17 | 2.51 | 1.11 - 5.69 | ||
| 2. ITC results: HVGIC versus composite resin restorations | |||||||
| DS-1 | DS-2 | OR | 95% CI | ||||
| CA01 | GA02 | 1.09 | 0.02 - 59.90 | ||||
| CA01 | GA10 | 0.09 | 0.001 - 6.08 | ||||
| CA02 | GA07 | 0.58 | 0.17 - 1.97 | ||||
| CA04 | GA17 | 1.02 | 0.38 - 2.73 | ||||
DS = Dataset number; Vol. = Journal volume; DS-1 = Dataset/Composite resin versus amalgam; DS-2 = Dataset/HVGIC versus amalgam; OR = Odds ratio; CI = Confidence interval; ln = Natural logarithm; SE = Standard error; EurJProsthodontRestDent = European Journal of Prosthodontic and Restorative Dentistry; JADA = Journal of the American Dental Association; PractClinMed = Practical Clinical Medicine (journal); JDR = Journal of Dental Research; PAHO = Pan-American Health Organisation; HVGIC = High-viscosity glass-ionomer cement.