Search result: There is a lack of clinical studies to this topic: Only three clinical trials were found and traced.
Clinical outcomes: The results are conflicting or suggest no difference between conventional GIC and Compomers in regard to their anticariogenic effects.
[‘Preliminary Systematic Literature Searches’ are based on SYSTEM’s periodic systematic searches of the dental literature and provide first overviews over existing clinical evidence but are limited in the number of databases searched, as well as the assessment of precision and internal validity of results and thus do not replace the need for a full systematic review report to the topic]
Mickenautsch, S. (2019). Cariostatic effect of conventional GIC versus compomers [October 08, 2016]. Afribary. Retrieved from https://afribary.com/works/cariostatic-effect-of-conventional-gic-versus-compomers-october-08-2016
Mickenautsch, Steffen "Cariostatic effect of conventional GIC versus compomers [October 08, 2016]" Afribary. Afribary, 27 May. 2019, https://afribary.com/works/cariostatic-effect-of-conventional-gic-versus-compomers-october-08-2016. Accessed 27 Apr. 2024.
Mickenautsch, Steffen . "Cariostatic effect of conventional GIC versus compomers [October 08, 2016]". Afribary, Afribary, 27 May. 2019. Web. 27 Apr. 2024. < https://afribary.com/works/cariostatic-effect-of-conventional-gic-versus-compomers-october-08-2016 >.
Mickenautsch, Steffen . "Cariostatic effect of conventional GIC versus compomers [October 08, 2016]" Afribary (2019). Accessed April 27, 2024. https://afribary.com/works/cariostatic-effect-of-conventional-gic-versus-compomers-october-08-2016