↓ Skip to main content

Evidence-based clinical practice guideline on nonrestorative treatments for carious lesions A report from the American Dental Association

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA), October 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
8 policy sources
twitter
29 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor
guideline
4 clinical guideline sources
podcasts
1 podcast

Readers on

mendeley
519 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Evidence-based clinical practice guideline on nonrestorative treatments for carious lesions A report from the American Dental Association
Published in
Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA), October 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.adaj.2018.07.002
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

An expert panel convened by the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs and the Center for Evidence-Based Dentistry conducted a systematic review and formulated evidence-based clinical recommendations for the arrest or reversal of noncavitated and cavitated dental caries using nonrestorative treatments in children and adults. The authors conducted a systematic search of the literature in MEDLINE and Embase via Ovid, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Cochrane database of systematic reviews to identify randomized controlled trials reporting on nonrestorative treatments for noncavitated and cavitated carious lesions. The authors used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to assess the certainty in the evidence and move from the evidence to the decisions. The expert panel formulated 11 clinical recommendations, each specific to lesion type, tooth surface, and dentition. Of the most effective interventions, the panel provided recommendations for the use of 38% silver diamine fluoride, sealants, 5% sodium fluoride varnish, 1.23% acidulated phosphate fluoride gel, and 5,000 parts per million fluoride (1.1% sodium fluoride) toothpaste or gel, among others. The panel also provided a recommendation against the use of 10% casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate. Although the recommended interventions are often used for caries prevention, or in conjunction with restorative treatment options, these approaches have shown to be effective in arresting or reversing carious lesions. Clinicians are encouraged to prioritize use of these interventions based on effectiveness, safety, and feasibility.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 519 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 519 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 53 10%
Student > Master 53 10%
Student > Postgraduate 35 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 4%
Other 101 19%
Unknown 232 45%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 233 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 1%
Materials Science 6 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 <1%
Other 24 5%
Unknown 235 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 102. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 January 2026.
All research outputs
#524,294
of 34,376,207 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA)
#70
of 3,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,859
of 385,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA)
#1
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,376,207 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,361 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 385,779 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.