Comparison 1. Atraumatic restorative treatment using high‐viscosity glass ionomer cement (H‐GIC) versus conventional treatment using H‐GIC.

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Restoration failure ‐ primary teeth ‐ longest follow‐up	5		Odds Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	1.60 [1.13, 2.27]
1.1 Single and multiple cavity surfaces	1		Odds Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	2.75 [0.50, 15.16]
1.2 Multiple cavity surfaces	3		Odds Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	1.62 [1.03, 2.55]
1.3 Type of cavity surfaces not reported	1		Odds Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.79 [0.12, 5.45]
2 Pain ‐ primary teeth	1	40	Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	‐0.65 [‐1.38, 0.07]
3 Participant experience ‐ discomfort	1		Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Totals not selected