Claim 1:
Olegário IC, Ladewig NM, Hesse D, Bonifácio CC, Braga MM, Imparato JCP, Mendes FM, Raggio DP. Is it worth using low-cost glass ionomer cements for occlusal ART restorations in primary molars? 2-year survival and cost analysis of a Randomized clinical trial. J Dent. 2020 Oct;101:103446.

Claims 2 - 10:
GC Gold Label IX
Clinical indication(s) / Claim(s)
Verbatim per manufacturer's Instructions-for-use (IFU) sheet

IFU Link
Claim 1: Class I restorations in deciduous teeth
Claim 2: Class II restorations in deciduous teeth
Claim 3: Non-load bearing Class I restorations in permanent teeth.
Claim 4: Non-load bearing Class II restorations in permanent teeth.
Claim 5: Intermediate restorative
Claim 6: base material for heavy stress situation in Class I cavities using sandwich laminate technique
Claim 7: base material for heavy stress situation in Class II cavities using sandwich laminate technique
Claim 8: Class V restorations
Claim 9: root surface restorations
Claim 10: Core build-up.







 
 
 
 

Clinical evidence supporting the claim(s)
From full report(s) of prospective, clinical controlled trial(s)
Clinical evidence not supporting the claim(s)
From full report(s) of prospective, clinical controlled trial(s)
Clinical evidence not related to the claim(s)
From full report(s) of prospective, clinical controlled trial(s)
(c) RCHSR
CQ-Score of the publication
Criterion I = 1 Criterion II  = 1 Criterion III  = 0 / Total score = 0
ElAziz RH, Mohammed MM, Gomaa HA. Clinical Performance of Short-fiber-reinforced Resin Composite Restorations vs Resin Composite Onlay Restorations in Complex Cavities of Molars (Randomized Clinical Trial). J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020 Mar 1;21(3):296-303.