Kang 2015.

Methods	RCT, parallel‐arm Teeth randomly assigned Conducted in the Department of Pediatric Dentistry at the Yonsei University Dental Hospital. Operators were seven paediatric dentists
Participants	102 children, 151 teeth, age range 3 to 10 years
Interventions	Group 1:Pulpotomy (RetroMTA); n = 49 (1 visit) Rubber dam Caries removal prior to pulpal access Pulp access with a round carbide bur Pulpotomy amputation with high‐speed then slow speed bur For haemostasis, cotton pellets wet by sterile saline Irrigation with saline filled with a resin‐modified glass ionomer cement after waiting 5 min for the MTA material to set and restored with a stainless‐steel crown at the first visit. Group 2:Pulpotomy (OrthoMTA); n = 47 (2 visits) Rubber dam Caries removal prior to pulpal access Pulp access with a round carbide bur Pulpotomy amputation with high‐speed then slow speed bur For haemostasis, cotton pellets wet by sterile saline Irrigation with saline wet cotton pellet and temporary filling with Caviton over the MTA materials. On the second visit, which took place within 3 weeks of the first visit, the teeth were filled with a resin‐modified glass ionomer cement and restored with a stainless‐steel crown Group 3:Pulpotomy (ProRoot MTA); n = 47 (2 visits) Rubber dam Caries removal prior to pulpal access Pulp access with a round carbide bur Pulpotomy amputation with high‐speed then slow speed bur For haemostasis, cotton pellets wet by sterile saline Irrigation with saline wet cotton pellet and temporary filling with Caviton over the MTA materials. On the second visit, which took place within 3 weeks of the first visit, the teeth were filled with a resin‐modified glass ionomer cement and restored with a stainless‐steel crown
Outcomes	Clinical failure (spontaneous pain and/or sensitivity to palpation/percussion; fistula, gingival redness, and swelling and/or mobility), radiological failure (bone resorption at the periapical and/or interradicular regions; PDL space widening; and external/internal root resorption): evaluation at 3, 6 and 12 months
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Table of random numbers
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to make a clear judgement
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to make a clear judgement
Blinding of clinical outcomes assessment	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to make a clear judgement
Blinding of radiological outcomes assessment	Low risk	Quote: "...one dental radiologist (KT Kim) who were not involved in this study were blinded to the group assignment and treatment and performed all radiographic follow‐up examinations after the completion of the 12‐month study period."
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Proportion of missing outcomes > 10% children randomly assigned
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to make a clear judgement