Skip to main content
. 2017 Dec 28;2017(12):CD008072. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008072.pub2

Comparison 2. Atraumatic restorative treatment using composite versus conventional treatment using composite.

Outcome or subgroup title No. of studies No. of participants Statistical method Effect size
1 Restoration failure ‐ primary teeth ‐ longest follow‐up 1   Odds Ratio (Random, 95% CI) Totals not selected
2 Participant experience ‐ dental anxiety 1   Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI) Totals not selected