Ramar 2010.

Methods	RCT, parallel‐arm Teeth randomly assigned Conducted in the Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Ragas Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India. Operators not mentioned
Participants	77 children, 96 teeth, age range 4 to 7 years
Interventions	Group 1:Pulpectomy (ZOE); n = 34 (1 visit) Rubber dam Caries removal prior to pulpal access Pulp access with slow‐speed bur Pulpotomy amputation with excavator Haemostasis not mentioned Irrigation with a mixture of 2.25% sodium hypochlorite solution (1.5 mL) and 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (1.5 mL) used as the irrigant Instrumentation with barbed broaches The canal was dried using appropriate sized paper points, the size of the last used H‐file ZOE with iodoform (RC FILL) applied after pulpectomy, followed by ZOE before being restored with stainless‐steel crown Group 2:Pulpectomy (calcium hydroxide + iodoform); n = 30 (1 visit) Rubber dam Caries removal prior to pulpal access Pulp access with slow‐speed bur Pulpotomy amputation with excavator Haemostasis not mentioned Irrigation with a mixture of 2.25% sodium hypochlorite solution (1.5 mL) and 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (1.5 mL) used as the irrigant Instrumentation with barbed broaches The canal was dried using appropriate sized paper points, the size of the last used H‐file. Metapex (CH/iodoform) applied after pulpectomy, followed by ZOE before being restored with stainless‐steel crown Group 3:Pulpectomy (ZOE + calcium hydroxide); n = 32 (1 visit) Rubber dam Caries removal prior to pulpal access Pulp access with slow‐speed bur Pulpotomy amputation with excavator Haemostasis not mentioned Irrigation with a mixture of 2.25% sodium hypochlorite solution (1.5 mL) and 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (1.5 mL) used as the irrigant Instrumentation with barbed broaches The canal was dried using appropriate sized paper points, the size of the last used H‐file ZOE and CH with iodoform applied after pulpectomy, followed by ZOE before being restored with stainless‐steel crown
Outcomes	Pain symptoms, furcal radiolucency, periapical radiolucency, excess filling material and its resorption, faster root resorption compared with contralateral, slower root resorption compared with contralateral, similar root resorption compared with contralateral: evaluation at 3, 6 and 9 months (at tooth level)
Notes	Source of funding: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to make a clear judgement
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	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to make a clear judgement
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Proportion of missing outcomes < 10% children randomly assigned
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to make a clear judgement