F-ACP dental mousse · White spots after orthodontic treatment · Six-month ICDAS remineralization evidence sheet

Required evidence, verification status and materials actually read
Item	AVerification status	BReading scope	CReview item	DCurrent findings	EWhy unverified	FRequired materials and conditions	GFurther research
1	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N01 · Evidence conditionWhich existing question and record are being presented in the sheet?Required	The selected question is 'ICDAS remineralization of white spots'; the question and existing verdict record are distinguished. The parent concerns lesion remineralization after orthodontic treatment, while the sibling concerns a different outcome, prevention of incident caries. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. The original candidate-boundary review wait is historical information; no model content/boundary review was performed in this work. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Relationships among the original question, record and parent/sibling outcomes	If additional material is provided, a linked outcome text retaining the original existing question and its connection
2	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N02 · Evidence conditionHow are the subclaim C/note, parent C50 and missing scores/axes distinguished?Required	The original subclaim grade C and note 'Score improvement was confirmed' are retained. Subclaim scores/status/axes are absent; the parent C50, Good status and axes are parent history. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. There are no direct values for the selected subclaim score, status or axes. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	A separate record of original subclaim/parent verdicts, notes, scores/axes and missing values	If an actual verdict correction is provided, separate the complete original text, event/version and change decision
3	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N03 · Evidence conditionWhat is shared among one report, lesions/patients and sibling questions?Required	Ciribè et al. 2024, PMID38927409, occupies 1 slot in each evidence/citation list. The same trial's patients, lesions/teeth, baseline/six months, safety and unmeasured caries-prevention context are linked. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Follow-up/other report versions, overlapping populations, lesion/tooth relationships and current unique trial/participant totals are unresolved. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Relationship table for bibliography/trial families, patients/teeth/lesions and times/outcomes	If additional reports are provided, distinguish relationships among the same populations/reports/outcomes and separate material
4	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N04 · Evidence conditionWhat are the actual summary-reading and external original-material statuses?Required	The complete specified stored summary was read for production and the original was preserved. The original PubMed URL is only linked; external abstracts, full texts, registrations and plans are unread. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. External public availability/acquisition, current content, access success and link operation were not verified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Stored summaries and external original-material existence/acquisition, reading level and original locations	When further acquisition is allowed, record actual reading/attempts and dates separately
5	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N05 · Evidence conditionWhat is the scope of white spots after orthodontic treatment and the actual population?Required	The original question concerns white spots after orthodontic treatment, and the existing English research description says 'randomized adolescents'. Each Korean/English population wording is preserved as recorded. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Age range, sex, baseline lesion/caries risk, orthodontic/retainer status, eligibility/exclusions and recruitment are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original population eligibility/exclusions, baseline risk, age and orthodontic-status table	Same-trial material specifying the selected population and direct outcomes, or appropriate separate material
6	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N06 · Evidence conditionWhat are the baseline lesion/tooth distribution and assessment conditions?Required	The original material presents patient counts and arm-specific baseline/six-month ICDAS values, but no separate lesion location, tooth/patient distribution or assessment environment. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Teeth/surfaces, lesion counts, lesion criteria, photography/drying, orthodontic completion timing, assessment environment and baseline balance are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original lesion/tooth distribution, selection criteria and assessment-environment/baseline table	Original material linking patient/lesion baseline status to measurement conditions
7	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N07 · Evidence conditionWhat are the original F-ACP ingredients and the other CPP-ACP product families?Required	The existing product information states that F-ACP is an amorphous calcium phosphate complex containing fluoride and carbonate. Marketing of fluoride/CPP-ACP product families in the existing advertising interpretation is a different-product-family context. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. The finished trial product/manufacturer, ingredient concentrations, other additives, batches, provision/quality and equivalence between products are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Trial-product identity, composition/concentration and original product/provision information	Material specifying applicability differences between the actual trial product and other compositions/products
8	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N08 · Evidence conditionWhat is the scope of six-month research exposure inside an Essix retainer?Required	The original research condition involved applying mousse inside an Essix retainer for six months. The combined product, retainer and duration exposure is recorded as originally stated. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Application amount, frequency, retainer wear/cleaning, actual adherence, discontinuations/changes, contact time and route details are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original product/retainer exposure, nominal/actual use and adherence/change material	Original implementation material linking actual exposure and outcomes in the same study
9	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N09 · Evidence conditionWere the control arm's fluoride and basic treatment conditions directly reported?Required	The existing verdict rationale records control-arm ICDAS values, but the specified summary contains no control product/fluoride ingredients, concentrations or exposure. F-ACP's fluoride ingredients and product-family marketing are not control treatment. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Direct definitions of control-arm fluoride/toothpaste, retainers, placebo/no treatment, hygiene/diet and common/arm-specific care are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original control treatment, product/concentration, common/arm-specific care and actual implementation	Protocol/report specifying the actual control and concurrent conditions in the same trial
10	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N10 · Evidence conditionWhat are the denominators for 106 randomized, 91 completers and 52/39 participants?Required	The original n is 106 randomized and 91 completers analyzed; the existing Korean research description records 52 mousse and 39 control participants. Each number is an original patient-denominator record. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Randomized n by arm, selection/exposure/completion/assessment flow, tooth/lesion counts and original counts by exclusion reason are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Allocation → exposure → completion/assessment → analysis, and patient/lesion denominator tables	Same-trial material linking arm-specific flow to original denominators for each unit
11	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N11 · Evidence conditionWhat is the scope of the original 14.2% dropout and completer selection?Required	The original records 91/106, 14.2% dropout and completer analysis. Dropout rates, analysis inclusion and original observation/exposure are distinguished. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Arm-specific dropout/nonadherence, timing/reasons, dropout baseline/outcomes, missing-data handling and sensitivity are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original dropout/exclusion, follow-up, baseline/missing-data handling and analysis flow	Same-trial material specifying completer/noncompleter data and original analysis assumptions
12	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N12 · Evidence conditionWhat are the original randomization, concealment and design details?Required	The evidence-list design is a randomized controlled trial. Actual allocation, concealment and baseline-balance details require material separately from the original subclaim/parent verdicts. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. The summary lacks parallel/cluster/crossover design, random-sequence/allocation concealment, baseline balance and implementation-role details. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original allocation/design, concealment, baseline tables and implementation material	Material specifying the actual comparative design in the protocol/report
13	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N13 · Evidence conditionWhat are the ICDAS assessment, masking and measurement reliability?Required	The original endpoint is the six-month ICDAS white-spot score. The original indicates greater lesion severity with higher scores, but assessors/masking and examination conditions are separate matters. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. ICDAS version, assessors/calibration, masking, photographs/examinations, inter-assessment agreement, missing assessments and arm differences are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original ICDAS criteria, assessors/masking, measurement conditions and reliability material	Original methods/appendices linking actual readings, measurement limitations and results
14	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N14 · Evidence conditionAre patient, tooth and lesion units distinguished from repeated measurements?Required	The original explanation identifies n as people and ICDAS as lesion scores. Multiple teeth/lesions and baseline/six-month values from the same person are not counted as independent participants. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. ICDAS aggregation units, lesions per patient, selected teeth/surfaces, cluster/repeated-measure handling and denominators are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Patient–tooth–lesion relationships, aggregation/models and unit-specific denominator/measurement tables	Material specifying original measurement units and within-patient correlation/repeated measurements
15	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N15 · Evidence conditionWhat are six-month ICDAS, nominal exposure and assessment timing?Required	The original records six-month ICDAS and six-month retainer/mousse exposure. Individual actual use duration, assessment windows and intermediate measurements are separate matters. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Orthodontic completion/baseline, final assessment timing, allowed windows, intermediate times, data cutoff and actual exposure/safety follow-up are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original schedules, baseline/six months, actual exposure/assessment and missing-data material	Same-trial material linking assessment windows/exposure and time-specific outcomes
16	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N16 · Evidence conditionWhat is the original direction of baseline and six-month final values?Required	The existing Korean verdict rationale records mousse 1.80→1.00 points and control 1.92→1.53 points. The original explanation that higher is worse and reduction indicates improvement is retained. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Details of each value's mean/median, dispersion/CI, aggregation/measurement unit, adjustment and original timing are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original baseline/final tables, aggregation/dispersion, units/denominators and models	The same report providing original final/baseline values, dispersion and outcome units
17	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N17 · Evidence conditionWhat do changes of 0.80 versus 0.39 points represent?Required	The original ICDAS reductions are 0.80 versus 0.39 points. Positively expressed reductions are recorded alongside the lower-is-better direction of final ICDAS values. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Details of sign/aggregation, change dispersion, paired measurements/adjustment and within-arm versus between-arm tests are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original change definitions, sign/units, dispersion, analysis methods and tables	Material reporting changes/final values and distinguishing within-arm/between-arm results
18	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N18 · Evidence conditionWhat is the level of the original 0.41-point difference in change?Required	The existing Korean verdict rationale records a 0.41-point difference in change. This existing original value is preserved; its model, CI and importance remain separate matters. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Adjustment, dispersion/CI, aggregation/clustering/repeated measurements and clinical-importance criteria are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original between-arm change differences, models/units and CI/criterion tables	Material reporting definitions/intervals and importance of original between-arm outcomes
19	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N19 · Evidence conditionWhat are between-arm P=0.003 and the effect interval?Required	The evidence list records between-arm P=0.003 and the existing English text records P=.003. These are retained alongside the original direction of ICDAS changes; P is distinguished from effect size/intervals. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Original tests/models, CIs, dispersion, multiplicity, measurement/analysis units and importance are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original statistical methods, test targets, effects/CIs and unit material	Original result tables linking actual models/intervals and testing objectives
20	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N20 · Evidence conditionWhat are score aggregation, models and within-arm/between-arm analyses?Required	The original records ICDAS baseline/final values, changes and between-arm P. The summary does not explain models for score means, categories/stages or patient/lesion aggregation. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Scale treatment, aggregation, baseline adjustment, clustering/repeated measurements, analysis assumptions, sensitivity and change dispersion are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original score aggregation/statistical methods, SAP, models/units and tables	Material specifying original ICDAS analysis with units, models and assumptions
21	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N21 · Evidence conditionHow do completer effects differ from effects in the full randomized population?Required	The original main result is a 91/106 completer analysis; the parent verdict historically described this defect as avoidable through ITT/missing-data handling. Actual ITT results were not provided. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Allocation/adherence effects, completion selection, arm-specific exclusions and original ITT/sensitivity outcomes are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original analysis populations, completion/exclusions, missing-data assumptions and alternative analyses	Material reporting randomized/completer populations and the actual scope of missing data
22	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N22 · Evidence conditionWhat are the reported intervals and criteria for an important ICDAS difference?Required	Original changes/differences and P are retained. Although ICDAS is lower-is-better, the summary lacks justified important-difference/patient-utility criteria and CIs. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Minimum important differences, stage/lesion-recovery criteria, intervals/dispersion and power/original plans are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original importance/clinical-linkage criteria, effect intervals and planning assumptions	If justified original criteria are provided, link them with score differences/intervals
23	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N23 · Evidence conditionWhat do registration 'Not confirmed', prespecification and plans mean?Required	The existing registration identifier record is the string 'Not confirmed'. The current registration ID remains null; this original record and unverified scope are retained. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Registration/protocol/SAP, original primary/secondary outcomes, analyses/times and change history are externally unread. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original registration/plans, endpoints/times, analysis versions and change material	If actual plans are provided, distinguish original unverified status from new additional events/comparison scope
24	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N24 · Evidence conditionWhat is the scope of multiplicity and disclosure of all outcomes/times?Required	The original material contains six-month ICDAS, adverse-effect reporting and unmeasured caries context. It does not provide a complete primary/secondary endpoint, time or analysis list. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Full outcome lists, multiplicity adjustment, exploratory/confirmatory status, prespecified analyses/changes and unpublished outcomes are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Protocol/SAP, all outcomes/times and reporting/change tables	Material linking original plans and reports by outcome
25	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N25 · Evidence conditionWhat are the original verdict and unmeasured scope for sibling caries prevention?Required	The caries-prevention sheet concerns 'Prevention of incident caries', with grade '?' and the note 'Not measured'. The parent verdict states that reduced new caries/filling treatment was not measured. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Original clinical-event definitions/collection, long-term outcomes, registration plans and current related material were not verified in this work. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	The same trial's outcome list and direct clinical-event material for the prevention question	If direct event material is provided, distinguish connections for remineralization from separate questions/scopes
26	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N26 · Evidence conditionDoes ICDAS remineralization also answer questions about new caries, fillings or tooth loss?Required	The selected outcome is a lesion-score surrogate. The existing core explanation/counterview states that improved scores cannot be transferred to reduced caries incidence or filling treatment. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Direct clinical-event effects, units/denominators, duration, surrogate prediction/mediation and long-term material are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Direct definitions, denominators and durations for new caries/treatment and tooth outcomes, with related validation	If appropriate direct event material is provided, link scores and clinical outcomes separately
27	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N27 · Evidence conditionAre visual improvement and benefits in patient appearance/daily life the same?Supplementary; required for extension to daily-life benefits	The existing counterview states that visual/score-based remineralization may be useful to patients. It does not provide direct patient satisfaction, appearance/pain or quality-of-life values. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Patient-reported appearance/satisfaction, daily life/quality of life, symptoms, persistence, importance and denominators are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Patient-centered outcomes/scales, definitions, denominators/times and original results	If material directly reporting patient-centered outcomes is provided, distinguish it from lesion scores
28	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N28 · Evidence conditionWhat are the concurrent or alternative effects of hygiene, fluoride, diet and retainers?Required	The original comparison concerns lesion-score changes with F-ACP mousse/Essix. The summary lacks actual balance in basic oral care, other products/diet and natural recovery. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Arm-specific concurrent fluoride/toothpaste, diet/hygiene, retainers, natural course, intervention/assessment differences and handling methods are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Control/concurrent treatment, actual behavior/adherence and original baseline/analysis material	Material linking common/different exposures and the original effect of interest in the same randomized comparison
29	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N29 · Evidence conditionWhat are actual adherence, discontinuations and duration/dose comparisons?Required	Six-month mousse exposure inside Essix is a nominal research condition. Actual individual adherence, dose reduction/discontinuation and direct comparisons of other durations/products are not separately provided. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Adherence measurement/distribution, discontinuations/changes, actual contact/amount and direct frequency/duration/formulation comparisons are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original adherence/changes, exposure and direct-comparison/SAP material	Material distinguishing direct exposure-specific outcomes in the same or appropriate additional research
30	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N30 · Evidence conditionWhat direct material addresses other populations, subgroups and long-term maintenance?Supplementary; required for extension	The original is a six-month lesion-surrogate trial in post-orthodontic white spots. Other ages/lesion risks, during-orthodontic/non-orthodontic settings and persistence after stopping are separate questions. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Prespecified subgroups/interactions, direct population/product comparisons, longer follow-up and persistence after stopping are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Extended populations/exposures, prespecified subgroups and duration-specific direct outcomes	If additional material is provided, specify differences from original populations, exposures and times in the connection
31	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N31 · Evidence conditionDo single-trial/R1/I1 history and current independent replication differ?Required	The parent records a small single trial and R1/I1 in the original verdict. The 1 evidence/citation slot, patients/teeth/lesions and two siblings are not current independent replications. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Current additional/follow-up reports, direct replication in other populations/products and material-family/independence relationships were not newly searched. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Report/trial/population, product/source and outcome relationships, with direct independent material	If material is provided, list same/separate/unclear populations and distinguish verification levels
32	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N32 · Evidence conditionWhat history is represented by the original small-study/completer and duration defect descriptions?Required	The parent verdict records two listed defects: fewer than 200 participants and completer analysis. It explains that six months was not counted because it was not shorter than 12 weeks. This is parent-score/verdict history. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. These case-specific conditions did not automatically adopt the original 200 participants/12 weeks as minimum criteria or reassess them as new defect scores. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Complete parent-verdict history and actual design/analysis material	If corrections/method changes are provided, preserve original history separately from new events
33	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N33 · Evidence conditionWhat is the scope of no patient/guardian-reported adverse effects over six months?Required	The existing safety description states that patients or guardians reported no adverse effects over six months. The original parent Good safety status is preserved separately from this reporting scope. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Event definitions, systematic/spontaneous collection, grades/discontinuations, original safety denominators and actual records/verification are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original adverse-effect reporting/collection, population/duration and definition/discontinuation material	Original material specifying reporting methods and the actual safety scope for the same exposure
34	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N34 · Evidence conditionWhat are the adverse-effect denominators, dropout and reporting selection?Required	The original 91/106 completers and 52/39 participants form the efficacy-analysis population. The summary does not distinguish whether patient/guardian adverse-effect reporting covered all randomized participants, completers or those actually exposed. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Safety populations, reporting/exposure/follow-up, events among dropouts, missing reports/recall and arm-specific detection differences are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original safety-population/exposure, collection/missing reports and dropout/follow-up tables	Safety material specifying denominators and reporting/follow-up selection
35	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N35 · Evidence conditionWhat are harm occurrence, discontinuation and exposure/follow-up times?Required	The original safety-reporting window is six months. Actual mousse/retainer exposure, onset/recovery, discontinuation/reuse and subsequent observation require separate material. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Event chronology, actual contact duration, discontinuation/re-exposure, collection windows/original cutoff and loss to follow-up are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original exposure/events, collection/discontinuation/recovery and timing material	Original material specifying actual time and safety follow-up for the same exposure
36	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N36 · Evidence conditionWhat are the harm or alternative causes involving ingredients, retainers and baseline conditions?Supplementary; required for extension of harm questions	The original exposure concerns fluoride/carbonate-containing F-ACP and Essix. The summary lacks contributions from other ingredients/retainers, baseline oral conditions/exposures and possible events. R01	The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Additives, baseline/concurrent conditions, other products, actual exposure, attribution/alternatives, vulnerable populations/long-term and rare harms are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original ingredients/products, baseline/concurrent conditions, event attribution and long-term/population-specific safety	If appropriate direct safety material is provided, distinguish differences from the original exposure/reporting scope
37	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N37 · Evidence conditionWhat is the original funding statement about no external funding?Required	The original evidence-list funding phrase 'This research received no external funding' and the Korean/English funding-check descriptions are retained. Original checked scope is distinguished from current reading. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Original contracts, institutional/internal funding, sponsor/author roles, complete COI and data access are externally unread. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original funding/resources, design/collection/analysis/publication roles and COI material	If actual original declarations are provided, record checked levels/locations separately from unverified scope
38	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N38 · Evidence conditionDoes unverified product-provision wording differ from actual absence of provision?Required	The original records that trial-product provision wording was not identified in the publicly checked COI/acknowledgments. Parent I1 represents that historical checked scope. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Complete product supply/in-kind support, author employment/patents, COI/acknowledgments, contracts and current changes are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original product-provision/contracts, COI/acknowledgments and role declarations	If original documents are provided, distinguish unverified/unreported status from the actual scope of provision/absence
39	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N39 · Evidence conditionWhat are the Korean/English texts, parent axes, false/null values and verdict history?Required	The parent C50/Good status, axes B/S/R1/I1/E+/B2, unrecorded precision, false coprimary-split/large hard-endpoint RCT/no-human-study flags and empty override reasons are preserved as originally recorded. Korean/English texts, synthesis, grade decisions and cross-checking are historical context. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Original values/axes and historical checks were not inherited as current subclaim scores, condition fulfillment or completed review. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Separate preservation of subclaim/parent, original languages/axes/empty values and verdict history	If actual corrections are provided, distinguish complete original text, events/versions and decisions by scope
40	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N40 · Evidence conditionDo the reference date, corrections/empty values differ from production dates/scope?Required	The original reference date 2026-08-26, empty corrections/deliberation and the 2024 bibliography/unverified registration record are preserved. Current time belongs to a production event. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Evidence reference-date/classification records are absent, and no registration/correction/retraction, new search/material or link comparison was performed. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Original publication/search/registration/correction versions and current production events	If material/corrections are actually provided, distinguish original scope, complete before/after text and new events
41	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N41 · Evidence conditionWhat are the boundaries between score benefits/reported harms and current applicability/product selection?Required	This sheet records ICDAS remineralization for the specified existing question and gaps in denominators/exposure, surrogates, safety and sponsorship in the same report. Individual dental products/use, treatment selection and current suitability are separate matters. R01	Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Current products/guidelines, individual oral status, other compositions/controls and direct material on current benefit/harm applicability were not verified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.	Direct material for extended populations/exposures, clinical events/patient outcomes and harms, with applicability differences	If material is provided and the scope allows, update research gaps while distinguishing the original sheet from other applicability questions

No items match your search or filter.

41 itemsWhat the statuses mean

Assessment scope

Stored-material review date: Not recorded
Original evidence cut-off: 2026-08-26
Scope actually checked: Existing review summaries and stored records of methodological application. Full papers, supplements, registrations, plans and original data were not read.
What the dates mean: This is the date the stored materials were checked, not the date of a new search of the clinical literature.
Population: White spots after orthodontic treatment; the original English term 'adolescents'; age, eligibility/exclusions and baseline lesion/tooth composition unverified
Ingredient, formulation and route: Original combined research exposure to fluoride/carbonate-containing amorphous calcium phosphate F-ACP mousse applied inside an Essix retainer
Dose: Only the nominal six months are retained; amount, frequency, actual contact, adherence and formulation details unverified. No product-use, conversion or dental administration instructions.
Comparator: Original control arm; the actual ingredient/concentration, fluoride/basic care and placebo/no-treatment definitions are absent from the specified existing review summary
Measured outcome: Six-month ICDAS white-spot lesion scores, with lower being better; original baseline, final, reduction and between-arm P distinguished. Patient/tooth/lesion aggregation unverified.
Duration: The six-month nominal exposure, score and adverse-effect reporting window are distinguished from actual individual follow-up, exposure and assessment windows
Questions outside this scope: Extending lesion scores to benefits in caries, fillings, teeth, daily life or patient satisfaction; Equating F-ACP with CPP-ACP, all fluoride products or the control fluoride definition; New calculations of lesion/tooth denominators, changes, differences, CIs, dropout or participant counts; Certifying no reported adverse effects or the original Good status as safety for all harms, long-term use or individuals; Instructions on product selection, amount, frequency, retainer care, dental treatment, suitability or substitution

Evidence and sources

The links below lead to the sources. A link alone does not mean the original source was read or its latest publication status verified.

R01 · Ciribè M, et al. Biomedicines. 2024;12:1202. PMID: 38927409.

PubMed

Material type: Preserved original randomized-trial report summary
Materials actually read: Summary read; external abstracts, full texts and registrations unread
Findings recorded in the stored summary: Change 0.80 versus 0.39 points, between-arm P=0.003; lower is better
Record level: Historical funding/COI/acknowledgment and verdict-check descriptions; no current paper/plan reading
Study overlap and independent replication: The same Ciribè 2024/PMID38927409 trial: 106 allocated, 91 completers/52 and 39 participants, ICDAS baseline/six months, adverse effects and sibling prevention context. Lesions/teeth/repeated times are not new people or independent material; registration 'Not confirmed' is original history.

Public availability, access and reading status by material
Material	Public availability	Access status	Actually read	Notes
Stored summary	Complete original-byte copy of the stored summary	Stored summary copy acquired and summary read	Summary read	The complete parent/subclaims, original ICDAS values, denominators, sources/registration and safety history were read for production. This is not original-paper/registration reading.
External abstract	External material unread; no access attempts	Access not attempted; not obtained	Not read	Only the original PubMed bibliography URL is linked; no abstract acquisition/reading or link testing.
External full text	External material unread; no access attempts	Access not attempted; not obtained	Not read	The original URL establishes bibliographic identity, not certification of full-text access, acquisition or reading.
External registration	External material unread; no access attempts	Access not attempted; not obtained	Not read	The original 'Not confirmed' record and null registration ID are retained. They are not converted to unregistered, nonexistence or access failure, and no URL is invented.
Required protocol	Not acquired; detailed existence unverified	Access not attempted; not obtained	Not read	Original eligibility, control fluoride, ingredients/exposure, ICDAS reading/timing and primary/secondary/change plans are needed.
Required analysis plan	Not acquired; detailed existence unverified	Access not attempted; not obtained	Not read	Original material on patient/tooth/lesion units, aggregation/models, repeated measurements/clustering, missing data/denominators/CIs and importance is needed.
Required result tables and safety material	Not acquired; detailed existence unverified	Access not attempted; not obtained	Not read	Original final/change/between-arm tables, dispersion/CIs, dropout/exposure, safety-reporting populations/times and attribution are needed.
Required funding and interests	Not acquired; detailed existence unverified	Access not attempted; not obtained	Not read	No external funding/unverified product wording are historical records. Complete declarations, product provision, sponsor/author roles are externally unread.

Report counts versus independent study counts

The same Ciribè 2024/PMID38927409 trial: 106 allocated, 91 completers/52 and 39 participants, ICDAS baseline/six months, adverse effects and sibling prevention context. Lesions/teeth/repeated times are not new people or independent material; registration 'Not confirmed' is original history.

Review criteria

Version 1.0 · Criteria record date 2026-10-06. These are Chamgap's own application conditions, informed by the referenced methods. They do not constitute official assessment-tool certification or a new efficacy score.

N01 · Which existing question and record are being presented in the sheet?

Required materials and conditions: Relationships among the original question, record and parent/sibling outcomes
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Which existing question and record are being presented in the sheet?" to the corresponding original record. The original candidate-boundary review wait is historical information; no model content/boundary review was performed in this work.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: The original candidate-boundary review wait is historical information; no model content/boundary review was performed in this work. This gap is retained with the preservation scope, without new numbers, calculations or reassessment.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Which existing question and record are being presented in the sheet?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C01

N02 · How are the subclaim C/note, parent C50 and missing scores/axes distinguished?

Required materials and conditions: A separate record of original subclaim/parent verdicts, notes, scores/axes and missing values
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "How are the subclaim C/note, parent C50 and missing scores/axes distinguished?" to the corresponding original record. There are no direct values for the selected subclaim score, status or axes.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not create a uniform D grade, inherit the parent's 50 points/axes, or create current condition fulfillment or a new verdict.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: How are the subclaim C/note, parent C50 and missing scores/axes distinguished?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C01, C09

N03 · What is shared among one report, lesions/patients and sibling questions?

Required materials and conditions: Relationship table for bibliography/trial families, patients/teeth/lesions and times/outcomes
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is shared among one report, lesions/patients and sibling questions?" to the corresponding original record. Follow-up/other report versions, overlapping populations, lesion/tooth relationships and current unique trial/participant totals are unresolved.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not count times, lesions/teeth, sibling sheets, the 106/91 participants or arm-specific participants as new participants or independent replications.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is shared among one report, lesions/patients and sibling questions?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C02, E07, H07

N04 · What are the actual summary-reading and external original-material statuses?

Required materials and conditions: Stored summaries and external original-material existence/acquisition, reading level and original locations
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the actual summary-reading and external original-material statuses?" to the corresponding original record. External public availability/acquisition, current content, access success and link operation were not verified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not upgrade summary reading to paper/registration reading or label no access attempt as access failure or absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the actual summary-reading and external original-material statuses?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C03

N05 · What is the scope of white spots after orthodontic treatment and the actual population?

Required materials and conditions: Original population eligibility/exclusions, baseline risk, age and orthodontic-status table
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the scope of white spots after orthodontic treatment and the actual population?" to the corresponding original record. Age range, sex, baseline lesion/caries risk, orthodontic/retainer status, eligibility/exclusions and recruitment are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Age range, sex, baseline lesion/caries risk, orthodontic/retainer status, eligibility/exclusions and recruitment are unverified. This gap is retained with the preservation scope, without new numbers, calculations or reassessment.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the scope of white spots after orthodontic treatment and the actual population?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C04, E08

N06 · What are the baseline lesion/tooth distribution and assessment conditions?

Required materials and conditions: Original lesion/tooth distribution, selection criteria and assessment-environment/baseline table
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the baseline lesion/tooth distribution and assessment conditions?" to the corresponding original record. Teeth/surfaces, lesion counts, lesion criteria, photography/drying, orthodontic completion timing, assessment environment and baseline balance are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Teeth/surfaces, lesion counts, lesion criteria, photography/drying, orthodontic completion timing, assessment environment and baseline balance are unverified. This gap is retained with the preservation scope, without new numbers, calculations or reassessment.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the baseline lesion/tooth distribution and assessment conditions?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C04, E03, C06

N07 · What are the original F-ACP ingredients and the other CPP-ACP product families?

Required materials and conditions: Trial-product identity, composition/concentration and original product/provision information
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the original F-ACP ingredients and the other CPP-ACP product families?" to the corresponding original record. The finished trial product/manufacturer, ingredient concentrations, other additives, batches, provision/quality and equivalence between products are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not equate F-ACP with CPP-ACP or all fluoride products, or convert product-family marketing into clinical-event evidence for this trial.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the original F-ACP ingredients and the other CPP-ACP product families?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C05, E08

N08 · What is the scope of six-month research exposure inside an Essix retainer?

Required materials and conditions: Original product/retainer exposure, nominal/actual use and adherence/change material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the scope of six-month research exposure inside an Essix retainer?" to the corresponding original record. Application amount, frequency, retainer wear/cleaning, actual adherence, discontinuations/changes, contact time and route details are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not turn the original research exposure into product-use instructions, retainer care, dose/frequency conversions or individual treatment guidance.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the scope of six-month research exposure inside an Essix retainer?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C05, E02, E08

N09 · Were the control arm's fluoride and basic treatment conditions directly reported?

Required materials and conditions: Original control treatment, product/concentration, common/arm-specific care and actual implementation
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Were the control arm's fluoride and basic treatment conditions directly reported?" to the corresponding original record. Direct definitions of control-arm fluoride/toothpaste, retainers, placebo/no treatment, hygiene/diet and common/arm-specific care are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not generate fluoride-control ingredients/concentrations, placebo/no-treatment definitions or use frequency absent from the existing review summary.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Were the control arm's fluoride and basic treatment conditions directly reported?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C05, E02

N10 · What are the denominators for 106 randomized, 91 completers and 52/39 participants?

Required materials and conditions: Allocation → exposure → completion/assessment → analysis, and patient/lesion denominator tables
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the denominators for 106 randomized, 91 completers and 52/39 participants?" to the corresponding original record. Randomized n by arm, selection/exposure/completion/assessment flow, tooth/lesion counts and original counts by exclusion reason are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not infer arm allocation from 106 participants or convert 52/39 into tooth/lesion counts.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the denominators for 106 randomized, 91 completers and 52/39 participants?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C07, E04

N11 · What is the scope of the original 14.2% dropout and completer selection?

Required materials and conditions: Original dropout/exclusion, follow-up, baseline/missing-data handling and analysis flow
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the scope of the original 14.2% dropout and completer selection?" to the corresponding original record. Arm-specific dropout/nonadherence, timing/reasons, dropout baseline/outcomes, missing-data handling and sensitivity are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not calculate new dropout counts from 106−91 or copy the original 14.2% as each arm's dropout rate.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the scope of the original 14.2% dropout and completer selection?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C07, E04, H06

N12 · What are the original randomization, concealment and design details?

Required materials and conditions: Original allocation/design, concealment, baseline tables and implementation material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the original randomization, concealment and design details?" to the corresponding original record. The summary lacks parallel/cluster/crossover design, random-sequence/allocation concealment, baseline balance and implementation-role details.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not arbitrarily mark cluster/crossover design as not applicable or fill all design details from the parent B2 axis.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the original randomization, concealment and design details?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E01

N13 · What are the ICDAS assessment, masking and measurement reliability?

Required materials and conditions: Original ICDAS criteria, assessors/masking, measurement conditions and reliability material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the ICDAS assessment, masking and measurement reliability?" to the corresponding original record. ICDAS version, assessors/calibration, masking, photographs/examinations, inter-assessment agreement, missing assessments and arm differences are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: ICDAS version, assessors/calibration, masking, photographs/examinations, inter-assessment agreement, missing assessments and arm differences are unverified. This gap is retained with the preservation scope, without new numbers, calculations or reassessment.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the ICDAS assessment, masking and measurement reliability?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E03, C06

N14 · Are patient, tooth and lesion units distinguished from repeated measurements?

Required materials and conditions: Patient–tooth–lesion relationships, aggregation/models and unit-specific denominator/measurement tables
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Are patient, tooth and lesion units distinguished from repeated measurements?" to the corresponding original record. ICDAS aggregation units, lesions per patient, selected teeth/surfaces, cluster/repeated-measure handling and denominators are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not transfer 91 patients or 52/39 participants to lesion/tooth denominators, or add repeated measurements/lesion counts as independent samples.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Are patient, tooth and lesion units distinguished from repeated measurements?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C02, C06, C07, E04

N15 · What are six-month ICDAS, nominal exposure and assessment timing?

Required materials and conditions: Original schedules, baseline/six months, actual exposure/assessment and missing-data material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are six-month ICDAS, nominal exposure and assessment timing?" to the corresponding original record. Orthodontic completion/baseline, final assessment timing, allowed windows, intermediate times, data cutoff and actual exposure/safety follow-up are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not present six months as identical actual exposure/complete follow-up for every patient or invent intermediate effects absent from original material.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are six-month ICDAS, nominal exposure and assessment timing?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C06, E03, E08

N16 · What is the original direction of baseline and six-month final values?

Required materials and conditions: Original baseline/final tables, aggregation/dispersion, units/denominators and models
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the original direction of baseline and six-month final values?" to the corresponding original record. Details of each value's mean/median, dispersion/CI, aggregation/measurement unit, adjustment and original timing are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not newly subtract baseline/final values or infer their dispersion/CIs or original control conditions.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the original direction of baseline and six-month final values?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C06, E04, E05

N17 · What do changes of 0.80 versus 0.39 points represent?

Required materials and conditions: Original change definitions, sign/units, dispersion, analysis methods and tables
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What do changes of 0.80 versus 0.39 points represent?" to the corresponding original record. Details of sign/aggregation, change dispersion, paired measurements/adjustment and within-arm versus between-arm tests are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not turn reductions of 0.80/0.39 into ICDAS increases or individual amounts of healing, or calculate new relative changes/effects.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What do changes of 0.80 versus 0.39 points represent?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C06, E04, E05

N18 · What is the level of the original 0.41-point difference in change?

Required materials and conditions: Original between-arm change differences, models/units and CI/criterion tables
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the level of the original 0.41-point difference in change?" to the corresponding original record. Adjustment, dispersion/CI, aggregation/clustering/repeated measurements and clinical-importance criteria are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Use 0.41 points only as the original value; do not derive final-value differences, change ratios or new CIs.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the level of the original 0.41-point difference in change?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E04, E05, C06

N19 · What are between-arm P=0.003 and the effect interval?

Required materials and conditions: Original statistical methods, test targets, effects/CIs and unit material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are between-arm P=0.003 and the effect interval?" to the corresponding original record. Original tests/models, CIs, dispersion, multiplicity, measurement/analysis units and importance are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not newly infer guaranteed individual remineralization, reduced caries or all forms of importance/clinical superiority from P=.003 alone.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are between-arm P=0.003 and the effect interval?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E05, E04

N20 · What are score aggregation, models and within-arm/between-arm analyses?

Required materials and conditions: Original score aggregation/statistical methods, SAP, models/units and tables
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are score aggregation, models and within-arm/between-arm analyses?" to the corresponding original record. Scale treatment, aggregation, baseline adjustment, clustering/repeated measurements, analysis assumptions, sensitivity and change dispersion are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not arbitrarily declare scores interval-scaled/normally distributed or models, adjustment or clustering not applicable.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are score aggregation, models and within-arm/between-arm analyses?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E04, C06

N21 · How do completer effects differ from effects in the full randomized population?

Required materials and conditions: Original analysis populations, completion/exclusions, missing-data assumptions and alternative analyses
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "How do completer effects differ from effects in the full randomized population?" to the corresponding original record. Allocation/adherence effects, completion selection, arm-specific exclusions and original ITT/sensitivity outcomes are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not turn completer analysis into full-population ITT or create new ITT values/bias magnitudes from the parent's explanation of avoidability.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: How do completer effects differ from effects in the full randomized population?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E04, C07

N22 · What are the reported intervals and criteria for an important ICDAS difference?

Required materials and conditions: Original importance/clinical-linkage criteria, effect intervals and planning assumptions
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the reported intervals and criteria for an important ICDAS difference?" to the corresponding original record. Minimum important differences, stage/lesion-recovery criteria, intervals/dispersion and power/original plans are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not automatically use 0.41 points, statistical positivity or parent C50 as criteria establishing patient-important effects.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the reported intervals and criteria for an important ICDAS difference?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E05, E09

N23 · What do registration 'Not confirmed', prespecification and plans mean?

Required materials and conditions: Original registration/plans, endpoints/times, analysis versions and change material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What do registration 'Not confirmed', prespecification and plans mean?" to the corresponding original record. Registration/protocol/SAP, original primary/secondary outcomes, analyses/times and change history are externally unread.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not convert 'Not confirmed' into unregistered/no registration, access failure or confirmed selective reporting.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What do registration 'Not confirmed', prespecification and plans mean?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E06, C09

N24 · What is the scope of multiplicity and disclosure of all outcomes/times?

Required materials and conditions: Protocol/SAP, all outcomes/times and reporting/change tables
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the scope of multiplicity and disclosure of all outcomes/times?" to the corresponding original record. Full outcome lists, multiplicity adjustment, exploratory/confirmatory status, prespecified analyses/changes and unpublished outcomes are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not certify that all endpoints/times match plans or that selective reporting is absent from P=.003 and a single report.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the scope of multiplicity and disclosure of all outcomes/times?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E06, C08

N25 · What are the original verdict and unmeasured scope for sibling caries prevention?

Required materials and conditions: The same trial's outcome list and direct clinical-event material for the prevention question
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the original verdict and unmeasured scope for sibling caries prevention?" to the corresponding original record. Original clinical-event definitions/collection, long-term outcomes, registration plans and current related material were not verified in this work.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not turn the sibling '?' into D or upgrade the original unmeasured description to zero prevention studies worldwide, zero effect or current full-text verification.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the original verdict and unmeasured scope for sibling caries prevention?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E09, C08

N26 · Does ICDAS remineralization also answer questions about new caries, fillings or tooth loss?

Required materials and conditions: Direct definitions, denominators and durations for new caries/treatment and tooth outcomes, with related validation
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Does ICDAS remineralization also answer questions about new caries, fillings or tooth loss?" to the corresponding original record. Direct clinical-event effects, units/denominators, duration, surrogate prediction/mediation and long-term material are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not extend positive remineralization/lesion scores to established caries prevention, avoidance of filling treatment or all dental-health benefits.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Does ICDAS remineralization also answer questions about new caries, fillings or tooth loss?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E09, E08

N27 · Are visual improvement and benefits in patient appearance/daily life the same?

Required materials and conditions: Patient-centered outcomes/scales, definitions, denominators/times and original results
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Are visual improvement and benefits in patient appearance/daily life the same?" to the corresponding original record. Patient-reported appearance/satisfaction, daily life/quality of life, symptoms, persistence, importance and denominators are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary; required for extension to daily-life benefits
Application exceptions: Do not turn the original possibility of usefulness into verified patient satisfaction, daily-life improvement or cosmetic effects.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Are visual improvement and benefits in patient appearance/daily life the same?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E09, E08

N28 · What are the concurrent or alternative effects of hygiene, fluoride, diet and retainers?

Required materials and conditions: Control/concurrent treatment, actual behavior/adherence and original baseline/analysis material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the concurrent or alternative effects of hygiene, fluoride, diet and retainers?" to the corresponding original record. Arm-specific concurrent fluoride/toothpaste, diet/hygiene, retainers, natural course, intervention/assessment differences and handling methods are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not declare all care identical or other causes absent from missing information, or generate oral-care instructions for users.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the concurrent or alternative effects of hygiene, fluoride, diet and retainers?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E02, H05

N29 · What are actual adherence, discontinuations and duration/dose comparisons?

Required materials and conditions: Original adherence/changes, exposure and direct-comparison/SAP material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are actual adherence, discontinuations and duration/dose comparisons?" to the corresponding original record. Adherence measurement/distribution, discontinuations/changes, actual contact/amount and direct frequency/duration/formulation comparisons are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not turn nominal six-month exposure into optimal duration/frequency, retainer-care or product-use recommendations.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are actual adherence, discontinuations and duration/dose comparisons?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E02, E08

N30 · What direct material addresses other populations, subgroups and long-term maintenance?

Required materials and conditions: Extended populations/exposures, prespecified subgroups and duration-specific direct outcomes
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What direct material addresses other populations, subgroups and long-term maintenance?" to the corresponding original record. Prespecified subgroups/interactions, direct population/product comparisons, longer follow-up and persistence after stopping are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary; required for extension
Application exceptions: Prespecified subgroups/interactions, direct population/product comparisons, longer follow-up and persistence after stopping are unverified. This gap is retained with the preservation scope, without new numbers, calculations or reassessment.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What direct material addresses other populations, subgroups and long-term maintenance?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E08, E07

N31 · Do single-trial/R1/I1 history and current independent replication differ?

Required materials and conditions: Report/trial/population, product/source and outcome relationships, with direct independent material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Do single-trial/R1/I1 history and current independent replication differ?" to the corresponding original record. Current additional/follow-up reports, direct replication in other populations/products and material-family/independence relationships were not newly searched.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not inherit a single trial/R1 and historical I1 as current worldwide trial counts or passed independence, or count outcomes/times as independent replications.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Do single-trial/R1/I1 history and current independent replication differ?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C02, E07, C10, H07

N32 · What history is represented by the original small-study/completer and duration defect descriptions?

Required materials and conditions: Complete parent-verdict history and actual design/analysis material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What history is represented by the original small-study/completer and duration defect descriptions?" to the corresponding original record. These case-specific conditions did not automatically adopt the original 200 participants/12 weeks as minimum criteria or reassess them as new defect scores.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not copy parent checklist criteria as universal participant/duration rules for new conditions, current completed review or reassessment.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What history is represented by the original small-study/completer and duration defect descriptions?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C09, E04, E05

N33 · What is the scope of no patient/guardian-reported adverse effects over six months?

Required materials and conditions: Original adverse-effect reporting/collection, population/duration and definition/discontinuation material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the scope of no patient/guardian-reported adverse effects over six months?" to the corresponding original record. Event definitions, systematic/spontaneous collection, grades/discontinuations, original safety denominators and actual records/verification are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not extend a no-reports sentence to zero events of all kinds, complete collection, individual harmlessness or long-term safety certification.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the scope of no patient/guardian-reported adverse effects over six months?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E10, H01, H09

N34 · What are the adverse-effect denominators, dropout and reporting selection?

Required materials and conditions: Original safety-population/exposure, collection/missing reports and dropout/follow-up tables
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the adverse-effect denominators, dropout and reporting selection?" to the corresponding original record. Safety populations, reporting/exposure/follow-up, events among dropouts, missing reports/recall and arm-specific detection differences are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill verified safety denominators with the 91 efficacy participants or 106 randomized participants, or calculate new incidence/intervals from no reports.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the adverse-effect denominators, dropout and reporting selection?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions H04, H06, C07

N35 · What are harm occurrence, discontinuation and exposure/follow-up times?

Required materials and conditions: Original exposure/events, collection/discontinuation/recovery and timing material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are harm occurrence, discontinuation and exposure/follow-up times?" to the corresponding original record. Event chronology, actual contact duration, discontinuation/re-exposure, collection windows/original cutoff and loss to follow-up are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not transfer nominal six-month exposure/reporting to complete individual harm observation or future safety.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are harm occurrence, discontinuation and exposure/follow-up times?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions H02, H04

N36 · What are the harm or alternative causes involving ingredients, retainers and baseline conditions?

Required materials and conditions: Original ingredients/products, baseline/concurrent conditions, event attribution and long-term/population-specific safety
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the harm or alternative causes involving ingredients, retainers and baseline conditions?" to the corresponding original record. Additives, baseline/concurrent conditions, other products, actual exposure, attribution/alternatives, vulnerable populations/long-term and rare harms are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary; required for extension of harm questions
Application exceptions: Do not exclude all events such as allergy/ingredient harms or generate product-suitability/use recommendations from no reports alone.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the harm or alternative causes involving ingredients, retainers and baseline conditions?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions H05, H08, E10

N37 · What is the original funding statement about no external funding?

Required materials and conditions: Original funding/resources, design/collection/analysis/publication roles and COI material
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the original funding statement about no external funding?" to the corresponding original record. Original contracts, institutional/internal funding, sponsor/author roles, complete COI and data access are externally unread.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not certify absence of all funding/product/company involvement or COI, or completed current independence from the no-external-funding quotation.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the original funding statement about no external funding?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C10

N38 · Does unverified product-provision wording differ from actual absence of provision?

Required materials and conditions: Original product-provision/contracts, COI/acknowledgments and role declarations
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Does unverified product-provision wording differ from actual absence of provision?" to the corresponding original record. Complete product supply/in-kind support, author employment/patents, COI/acknowledgments, contracts and current changes are unverified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not convert unconfirmed wording into no product provision, external access failure or current independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Does unverified product-provision wording differ from actual absence of provision?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C10, C09

N39 · What are the Korean/English texts, parent axes, false/null values and verdict history?

Required materials and conditions: Separate preservation of subclaim/parent, original languages/axes/empty values and verdict history
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the Korean/English texts, parent axes, false/null values and verdict history?" to the corresponding original record. Original values/axes and historical checks were not inherited as current subclaim scores, condition fulfillment or completed review.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill unrecorded precision with 0 or declare parent B2, historical checking/cross-checking as newly completed model review or subclaim scores.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the Korean/English texts, parent axes, false/null values and verdict history?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C01, C09, E06

N40 · Do the reference date, corrections/empty values differ from production dates/scope?

Required materials and conditions: Original publication/search/registration/correction versions and current production events
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Do the reference date, corrections/empty values differ from production dates/scope?" to the corresponding original record. Evidence reference-date/classification records are absent, and no registration/correction/retraction, new search/material or link comparison was performed.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not borrow empty corrections/the original reference date as current absence of corrections or this work's review date, or label no search as zero studies.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Do the reference date, corrections/empty values differ from production dates/scope?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C09, C03

N41 · What are the boundaries between score benefits/reported harms and current applicability/product selection?

Required materials and conditions: Direct material for extended populations/exposures, clinical events/patient outcomes and harms, with applicability differences
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the boundaries between score benefits/reported harms and current applicability/product selection?" to the corresponding original record. Current products/guidelines, individual oral status, other compositions/controls and direct material on current benefit/harm applicability were not verified.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not extend C/positive scores, the original Good status or no reported adverse effects to caries prevention/daily-life benefits, individual safety/suitability or product-use/selection/administration recommendations.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the boundaries between score benefits/reported harms and current applicability/product selection?
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions H09, E09, E08, C09

Referenced methods and the sections actually reviewed

M03 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08

Official methodology · §3.1, §3.2.1–3.2.3, MECIR C5/C7/C13

Referenced principle: Clearly record the question, eligibility conditions and reasons for changes, and distinguish variations in interventions.
Extent of review: Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work.

M04 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5.1 (2025), chapter updated 2025-03

Official methodology · §4.5, §4.6.1–4.6.3, MECIR C42

Referenced principle: Distinguish studies from reports and link them; do not omit a study solely because results are unreported.
Extent of review: Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work.

M08 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10

Official methodology · §8.1–8.2.3, Table 8.2.a

Referenced principle: Define the outcome and effect of interest, then examine randomization, deviations, missing data, measurement and selective reporting.
Extent of review: Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work.

M15 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08

Official methodology · §15.2.4, §15.3.1–15.3.3

Referenced principle: Distinguish effect estimates, intervals, importance and applicability. Sample size alone does not determine precision.
Extent of review: Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work.

M19 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10

Official methodology · §19.1.2, §19.2.1–19.2.4

Referenced principle: Harm questions may require different designs, populations and follow-up from efficacy questions. Case reports do not establish incidence rates.
Extent of review: Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work.

What the statuses mean

Met: The original content has been reviewed as meeting the conditions. This status is not used in this preparation.
Partly verified: Some information in the stored summary was linked during preparation; clinical verification or review is not complete.
Unverified: Required direct values, definitions or materials have not been established within the current storage and reading scope. This does not mean zero effect, no papers or failed access.
Review incomplete: Review of existing content or actual review incomplete.
Not reported: Used only when original materials were actually read and the outcome was judged unreported. Not used for external materials unread in this work.
Inaccessible: Used only when an actual access attempt has a recorded failure. Not used for access that was not attempted in this work.
Insufficient evidence for the conditions: Indicates insufficient direct materials for the relevant scope or conditions; it is not a new grade.
Not applicable: Used when the reason it does not apply to the original question is stated.
Conflicting data: Retains the scope of conflicting statements in original materials; it is not an arbitrary reassessment.

Change history

2026-10-10 · Public page/material version 1.0

The reader view and materials were prepared from the existing 41 items. No new clinical search, verification-status changes or scoring were performed.

The stored-material review date (Not recorded) and original evidence cut-off (2026-08-26) were retained unchanged.

Researcher downloads

These materials provide the same evidence, scope and verification status as this page.

View all item details

N01 · Which existing question and record are being presented in the sheet?

Current findings: The selected question is 'ICDAS remineralization of white spots'; the question and existing verdict record are distinguished. The parent concerns lesion remineralization after orthodontic treatment, while the sibling concerns a different outcome, prevention of incident caries.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. The original candidate-boundary review wait is historical information; no model content/boundary review was performed in this work. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: The original candidate-boundary review wait is historical information; no model content/boundary review was performed in this work.
Required materials and conditions: Relationships among the original question, record and parent/sibling outcomes
Materials to obtain first: Relationships among the original question, record and parent/sibling outcomes
Further research: If additional material is provided, a linked outcome text retaining the original existing question and its connection
Remaining uncertainty: The original candidate-boundary review wait is historical information; no model content/boundary review was performed in this work.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Which existing question and record are being presented in the sheet?" to the corresponding original record. The original candidate-boundary review wait is historical information; no model content/boundary review was performed in this work.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Which existing question and record are being presented in the sheet?
Application exceptions: The original candidate-boundary review wait is historical information; no model content/boundary review was performed in this work. This gap is retained with the preservation scope, without new numbers, calculations or reassessment.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C01

Related sources R01

N02 · How are the subclaim C/note, parent C50 and missing scores/axes distinguished?

Current findings: The original subclaim grade C and note 'Score improvement was confirmed' are retained. Subclaim scores/status/axes are absent; the parent C50, Good status and axes are parent history.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. There are no direct values for the selected subclaim score, status or axes. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: There are no direct values for the selected subclaim score, status or axes.
Required materials and conditions: A separate record of original subclaim/parent verdicts, notes, scores/axes and missing values
Materials to obtain first: A separate record of original subclaim/parent verdicts, notes, scores/axes and missing values
Further research: If an actual verdict correction is provided, separate the complete original text, event/version and change decision
Remaining uncertainty: There are no direct values for the selected subclaim score, status or axes.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "How are the subclaim C/note, parent C50 and missing scores/axes distinguished?" to the corresponding original record. There are no direct values for the selected subclaim score, status or axes.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: How are the subclaim C/note, parent C50 and missing scores/axes distinguished?
Application exceptions: Do not create a uniform D grade, inherit the parent's 50 points/axes, or create current condition fulfillment or a new verdict.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C01, C09

Related sources R01

N03 · What is shared among one report, lesions/patients and sibling questions?

Current findings: Ciribè et al. 2024, PMID38927409, occupies 1 slot in each evidence/citation list. The same trial's patients, lesions/teeth, baseline/six months, safety and unmeasured caries-prevention context are linked.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Follow-up/other report versions, overlapping populations, lesion/tooth relationships and current unique trial/participant totals are unresolved. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Follow-up/other report versions, overlapping populations, lesion/tooth relationships and current unique trial/participant totals are unresolved.
Required materials and conditions: Relationship table for bibliography/trial families, patients/teeth/lesions and times/outcomes
Materials to obtain first: Relationship table for bibliography/trial families, patients/teeth/lesions and times/outcomes
Further research: If additional reports are provided, distinguish relationships among the same populations/reports/outcomes and separate material
Remaining uncertainty: Follow-up/other report versions, overlapping populations, lesion/tooth relationships and current unique trial/participant totals are unresolved.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is shared among one report, lesions/patients and sibling questions?" to the corresponding original record. Follow-up/other report versions, overlapping populations, lesion/tooth relationships and current unique trial/participant totals are unresolved.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is shared among one report, lesions/patients and sibling questions?
Application exceptions: Do not count times, lesions/teeth, sibling sheets, the 106/91 participants or arm-specific participants as new participants or independent replications.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C02, E07, H07

Related sources R01

N04 · What are the actual summary-reading and external original-material statuses?

Current findings: The complete specified stored summary was read for production and the original was preserved. The original PubMed URL is only linked; external abstracts, full texts, registrations and plans are unread.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. External public availability/acquisition, current content, access success and link operation were not verified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: External public availability/acquisition, current content, access success and link operation were not verified.
Required materials and conditions: Stored summaries and external original-material existence/acquisition, reading level and original locations
Materials to obtain first: Stored summaries and external original-material existence/acquisition, reading level and original locations
Further research: When further acquisition is allowed, record actual reading/attempts and dates separately
Remaining uncertainty: External public availability/acquisition, current content, access success and link operation were not verified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the actual summary-reading and external original-material statuses?" to the corresponding original record. External public availability/acquisition, current content, access success and link operation were not verified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the actual summary-reading and external original-material statuses?
Application exceptions: Do not upgrade summary reading to paper/registration reading or label no access attempt as access failure or absence of research.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C03

Related sources R01

N05 · What is the scope of white spots after orthodontic treatment and the actual population?

Current findings: The original question concerns white spots after orthodontic treatment, and the existing English research description says 'randomized adolescents'. Each Korean/English population wording is preserved as recorded.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Age range, sex, baseline lesion/caries risk, orthodontic/retainer status, eligibility/exclusions and recruitment are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Age range, sex, baseline lesion/caries risk, orthodontic/retainer status, eligibility/exclusions and recruitment are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original population eligibility/exclusions, baseline risk, age and orthodontic-status table
Materials to obtain first: Original population eligibility/exclusions, baseline risk, age and orthodontic-status table
Further research: Same-trial material specifying the selected population and direct outcomes, or appropriate separate material
Remaining uncertainty: Age range, sex, baseline lesion/caries risk, orthodontic/retainer status, eligibility/exclusions and recruitment are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the scope of white spots after orthodontic treatment and the actual population?" to the corresponding original record. Age range, sex, baseline lesion/caries risk, orthodontic/retainer status, eligibility/exclusions and recruitment are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the scope of white spots after orthodontic treatment and the actual population?
Application exceptions: Age range, sex, baseline lesion/caries risk, orthodontic/retainer status, eligibility/exclusions and recruitment are unverified. This gap is retained with the preservation scope, without new numbers, calculations or reassessment.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C04, E08

Related sources R01

N06 · What are the baseline lesion/tooth distribution and assessment conditions?

Current findings: The original material presents patient counts and arm-specific baseline/six-month ICDAS values, but no separate lesion location, tooth/patient distribution or assessment environment.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Teeth/surfaces, lesion counts, lesion criteria, photography/drying, orthodontic completion timing, assessment environment and baseline balance are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Teeth/surfaces, lesion counts, lesion criteria, photography/drying, orthodontic completion timing, assessment environment and baseline balance are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original lesion/tooth distribution, selection criteria and assessment-environment/baseline table
Materials to obtain first: Original lesion/tooth distribution, selection criteria and assessment-environment/baseline table
Further research: Original material linking patient/lesion baseline status to measurement conditions
Remaining uncertainty: Teeth/surfaces, lesion counts, lesion criteria, photography/drying, orthodontic completion timing, assessment environment and baseline balance are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the baseline lesion/tooth distribution and assessment conditions?" to the corresponding original record. Teeth/surfaces, lesion counts, lesion criteria, photography/drying, orthodontic completion timing, assessment environment and baseline balance are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the baseline lesion/tooth distribution and assessment conditions?
Application exceptions: Teeth/surfaces, lesion counts, lesion criteria, photography/drying, orthodontic completion timing, assessment environment and baseline balance are unverified. This gap is retained with the preservation scope, without new numbers, calculations or reassessment.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C04, E03, C06

Related sources R01

N07 · What are the original F-ACP ingredients and the other CPP-ACP product families?

Current findings: The existing product information states that F-ACP is an amorphous calcium phosphate complex containing fluoride and carbonate. Marketing of fluoride/CPP-ACP product families in the existing advertising interpretation is a different-product-family context.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. The finished trial product/manufacturer, ingredient concentrations, other additives, batches, provision/quality and equivalence between products are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: The finished trial product/manufacturer, ingredient concentrations, other additives, batches, provision/quality and equivalence between products are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Trial-product identity, composition/concentration and original product/provision information
Materials to obtain first: Trial-product identity, composition/concentration and original product/provision information
Further research: Material specifying applicability differences between the actual trial product and other compositions/products
Remaining uncertainty: The finished trial product/manufacturer, ingredient concentrations, other additives, batches, provision/quality and equivalence between products are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the original F-ACP ingredients and the other CPP-ACP product families?" to the corresponding original record. The finished trial product/manufacturer, ingredient concentrations, other additives, batches, provision/quality and equivalence between products are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the original F-ACP ingredients and the other CPP-ACP product families?
Application exceptions: Do not equate F-ACP with CPP-ACP or all fluoride products, or convert product-family marketing into clinical-event evidence for this trial.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C05, E08

Related sources R01

N08 · What is the scope of six-month research exposure inside an Essix retainer?

Current findings: The original research condition involved applying mousse inside an Essix retainer for six months. The combined product, retainer and duration exposure is recorded as originally stated.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Application amount, frequency, retainer wear/cleaning, actual adherence, discontinuations/changes, contact time and route details are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Application amount, frequency, retainer wear/cleaning, actual adherence, discontinuations/changes, contact time and route details are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original product/retainer exposure, nominal/actual use and adherence/change material
Materials to obtain first: Original product/retainer exposure, nominal/actual use and adherence/change material
Further research: Original implementation material linking actual exposure and outcomes in the same study
Remaining uncertainty: Application amount, frequency, retainer wear/cleaning, actual adherence, discontinuations/changes, contact time and route details are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the scope of six-month research exposure inside an Essix retainer?" to the corresponding original record. Application amount, frequency, retainer wear/cleaning, actual adherence, discontinuations/changes, contact time and route details are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the scope of six-month research exposure inside an Essix retainer?
Application exceptions: Do not turn the original research exposure into product-use instructions, retainer care, dose/frequency conversions or individual treatment guidance.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C05, E02, E08

Related sources R01

N09 · Were the control arm's fluoride and basic treatment conditions directly reported?

Current findings: The existing verdict rationale records control-arm ICDAS values, but the specified summary contains no control product/fluoride ingredients, concentrations or exposure. F-ACP's fluoride ingredients and product-family marketing are not control treatment.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Direct definitions of control-arm fluoride/toothpaste, retainers, placebo/no treatment, hygiene/diet and common/arm-specific care are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Direct definitions of control-arm fluoride/toothpaste, retainers, placebo/no treatment, hygiene/diet and common/arm-specific care are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original control treatment, product/concentration, common/arm-specific care and actual implementation
Materials to obtain first: Original control treatment, product/concentration, common/arm-specific care and actual implementation
Further research: Protocol/report specifying the actual control and concurrent conditions in the same trial
Remaining uncertainty: Direct definitions of control-arm fluoride/toothpaste, retainers, placebo/no treatment, hygiene/diet and common/arm-specific care are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Were the control arm's fluoride and basic treatment conditions directly reported?" to the corresponding original record. Direct definitions of control-arm fluoride/toothpaste, retainers, placebo/no treatment, hygiene/diet and common/arm-specific care are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Were the control arm's fluoride and basic treatment conditions directly reported?
Application exceptions: Do not generate fluoride-control ingredients/concentrations, placebo/no-treatment definitions or use frequency absent from the existing review summary.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C05, E02

Related sources R01

N10 · What are the denominators for 106 randomized, 91 completers and 52/39 participants?

Current findings: The original n is 106 randomized and 91 completers analyzed; the existing Korean research description records 52 mousse and 39 control participants. Each number is an original patient-denominator record.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Randomized n by arm, selection/exposure/completion/assessment flow, tooth/lesion counts and original counts by exclusion reason are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Randomized n by arm, selection/exposure/completion/assessment flow, tooth/lesion counts and original counts by exclusion reason are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Allocation → exposure → completion/assessment → analysis, and patient/lesion denominator tables
Materials to obtain first: Allocation → exposure → completion/assessment → analysis, and patient/lesion denominator tables
Further research: Same-trial material linking arm-specific flow to original denominators for each unit
Remaining uncertainty: Randomized n by arm, selection/exposure/completion/assessment flow, tooth/lesion counts and original counts by exclusion reason are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the denominators for 106 randomized, 91 completers and 52/39 participants?" to the corresponding original record. Randomized n by arm, selection/exposure/completion/assessment flow, tooth/lesion counts and original counts by exclusion reason are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the denominators for 106 randomized, 91 completers and 52/39 participants?
Application exceptions: Do not infer arm allocation from 106 participants or convert 52/39 into tooth/lesion counts.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C07, E04

Related sources R01

N11 · What is the scope of the original 14.2% dropout and completer selection?

Current findings: The original records 91/106, 14.2% dropout and completer analysis. Dropout rates, analysis inclusion and original observation/exposure are distinguished.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Arm-specific dropout/nonadherence, timing/reasons, dropout baseline/outcomes, missing-data handling and sensitivity are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Arm-specific dropout/nonadherence, timing/reasons, dropout baseline/outcomes, missing-data handling and sensitivity are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original dropout/exclusion, follow-up, baseline/missing-data handling and analysis flow
Materials to obtain first: Original dropout/exclusion, follow-up, baseline/missing-data handling and analysis flow
Further research: Same-trial material specifying completer/noncompleter data and original analysis assumptions
Remaining uncertainty: Arm-specific dropout/nonadherence, timing/reasons, dropout baseline/outcomes, missing-data handling and sensitivity are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the scope of the original 14.2% dropout and completer selection?" to the corresponding original record. Arm-specific dropout/nonadherence, timing/reasons, dropout baseline/outcomes, missing-data handling and sensitivity are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the scope of the original 14.2% dropout and completer selection?
Application exceptions: Do not calculate new dropout counts from 106−91 or copy the original 14.2% as each arm's dropout rate.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C07, E04, H06

Related sources R01

N12 · What are the original randomization, concealment and design details?

Current findings: The evidence-list design is a randomized controlled trial. Actual allocation, concealment and baseline-balance details require material separately from the original subclaim/parent verdicts.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. The summary lacks parallel/cluster/crossover design, random-sequence/allocation concealment, baseline balance and implementation-role details. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: The summary lacks parallel/cluster/crossover design, random-sequence/allocation concealment, baseline balance and implementation-role details.
Required materials and conditions: Original allocation/design, concealment, baseline tables and implementation material
Materials to obtain first: Original allocation/design, concealment, baseline tables and implementation material
Further research: Material specifying the actual comparative design in the protocol/report
Remaining uncertainty: The summary lacks parallel/cluster/crossover design, random-sequence/allocation concealment, baseline balance and implementation-role details.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the original randomization, concealment and design details?" to the corresponding original record. The summary lacks parallel/cluster/crossover design, random-sequence/allocation concealment, baseline balance and implementation-role details.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the original randomization, concealment and design details?
Application exceptions: Do not arbitrarily mark cluster/crossover design as not applicable or fill all design details from the parent B2 axis.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E01

Related sources R01

N13 · What are the ICDAS assessment, masking and measurement reliability?

Current findings: The original endpoint is the six-month ICDAS white-spot score. The original indicates greater lesion severity with higher scores, but assessors/masking and examination conditions are separate matters.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. ICDAS version, assessors/calibration, masking, photographs/examinations, inter-assessment agreement, missing assessments and arm differences are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: ICDAS version, assessors/calibration, masking, photographs/examinations, inter-assessment agreement, missing assessments and arm differences are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original ICDAS criteria, assessors/masking, measurement conditions and reliability material
Materials to obtain first: Original ICDAS criteria, assessors/masking, measurement conditions and reliability material
Further research: Original methods/appendices linking actual readings, measurement limitations and results
Remaining uncertainty: ICDAS version, assessors/calibration, masking, photographs/examinations, inter-assessment agreement, missing assessments and arm differences are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the ICDAS assessment, masking and measurement reliability?" to the corresponding original record. ICDAS version, assessors/calibration, masking, photographs/examinations, inter-assessment agreement, missing assessments and arm differences are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the ICDAS assessment, masking and measurement reliability?
Application exceptions: ICDAS version, assessors/calibration, masking, photographs/examinations, inter-assessment agreement, missing assessments and arm differences are unverified. This gap is retained with the preservation scope, without new numbers, calculations or reassessment.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E03, C06

Related sources R01

N14 · Are patient, tooth and lesion units distinguished from repeated measurements?

Current findings: The original explanation identifies n as people and ICDAS as lesion scores. Multiple teeth/lesions and baseline/six-month values from the same person are not counted as independent participants.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. ICDAS aggregation units, lesions per patient, selected teeth/surfaces, cluster/repeated-measure handling and denominators are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: ICDAS aggregation units, lesions per patient, selected teeth/surfaces, cluster/repeated-measure handling and denominators are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Patient–tooth–lesion relationships, aggregation/models and unit-specific denominator/measurement tables
Materials to obtain first: Patient–tooth–lesion relationships, aggregation/models and unit-specific denominator/measurement tables
Further research: Material specifying original measurement units and within-patient correlation/repeated measurements
Remaining uncertainty: ICDAS aggregation units, lesions per patient, selected teeth/surfaces, cluster/repeated-measure handling and denominators are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Are patient, tooth and lesion units distinguished from repeated measurements?" to the corresponding original record. ICDAS aggregation units, lesions per patient, selected teeth/surfaces, cluster/repeated-measure handling and denominators are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Are patient, tooth and lesion units distinguished from repeated measurements?
Application exceptions: Do not transfer 91 patients or 52/39 participants to lesion/tooth denominators, or add repeated measurements/lesion counts as independent samples.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C02, C06, C07, E04

Related sources R01

N15 · What are six-month ICDAS, nominal exposure and assessment timing?

Current findings: The original records six-month ICDAS and six-month retainer/mousse exposure. Individual actual use duration, assessment windows and intermediate measurements are separate matters.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Orthodontic completion/baseline, final assessment timing, allowed windows, intermediate times, data cutoff and actual exposure/safety follow-up are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Orthodontic completion/baseline, final assessment timing, allowed windows, intermediate times, data cutoff and actual exposure/safety follow-up are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original schedules, baseline/six months, actual exposure/assessment and missing-data material
Materials to obtain first: Original schedules, baseline/six months, actual exposure/assessment and missing-data material
Further research: Same-trial material linking assessment windows/exposure and time-specific outcomes
Remaining uncertainty: Orthodontic completion/baseline, final assessment timing, allowed windows, intermediate times, data cutoff and actual exposure/safety follow-up are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are six-month ICDAS, nominal exposure and assessment timing?" to the corresponding original record. Orthodontic completion/baseline, final assessment timing, allowed windows, intermediate times, data cutoff and actual exposure/safety follow-up are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are six-month ICDAS, nominal exposure and assessment timing?
Application exceptions: Do not present six months as identical actual exposure/complete follow-up for every patient or invent intermediate effects absent from original material.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C06, E03, E08

Related sources R01

N16 · What is the original direction of baseline and six-month final values?

Current findings: The existing Korean verdict rationale records mousse 1.80→1.00 points and control 1.92→1.53 points. The original explanation that higher is worse and reduction indicates improvement is retained.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Details of each value's mean/median, dispersion/CI, aggregation/measurement unit, adjustment and original timing are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Details of each value's mean/median, dispersion/CI, aggregation/measurement unit, adjustment and original timing are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original baseline/final tables, aggregation/dispersion, units/denominators and models
Materials to obtain first: Original baseline/final tables, aggregation/dispersion, units/denominators and models
Further research: The same report providing original final/baseline values, dispersion and outcome units
Remaining uncertainty: Details of each value's mean/median, dispersion/CI, aggregation/measurement unit, adjustment and original timing are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the original direction of baseline and six-month final values?" to the corresponding original record. Details of each value's mean/median, dispersion/CI, aggregation/measurement unit, adjustment and original timing are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the original direction of baseline and six-month final values?
Application exceptions: Do not newly subtract baseline/final values or infer their dispersion/CIs or original control conditions.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C06, E04, E05

Related sources R01

N17 · What do changes of 0.80 versus 0.39 points represent?

Current findings: The original ICDAS reductions are 0.80 versus 0.39 points. Positively expressed reductions are recorded alongside the lower-is-better direction of final ICDAS values.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Details of sign/aggregation, change dispersion, paired measurements/adjustment and within-arm versus between-arm tests are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Details of sign/aggregation, change dispersion, paired measurements/adjustment and within-arm versus between-arm tests are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original change definitions, sign/units, dispersion, analysis methods and tables
Materials to obtain first: Original change definitions, sign/units, dispersion, analysis methods and tables
Further research: Material reporting changes/final values and distinguishing within-arm/between-arm results
Remaining uncertainty: Details of sign/aggregation, change dispersion, paired measurements/adjustment and within-arm versus between-arm tests are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What do changes of 0.80 versus 0.39 points represent?" to the corresponding original record. Details of sign/aggregation, change dispersion, paired measurements/adjustment and within-arm versus between-arm tests are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What do changes of 0.80 versus 0.39 points represent?
Application exceptions: Do not turn reductions of 0.80/0.39 into ICDAS increases or individual amounts of healing, or calculate new relative changes/effects.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C06, E04, E05

Related sources R01

N18 · What is the level of the original 0.41-point difference in change?

Current findings: The existing Korean verdict rationale records a 0.41-point difference in change. This existing original value is preserved; its model, CI and importance remain separate matters.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Adjustment, dispersion/CI, aggregation/clustering/repeated measurements and clinical-importance criteria are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Adjustment, dispersion/CI, aggregation/clustering/repeated measurements and clinical-importance criteria are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original between-arm change differences, models/units and CI/criterion tables
Materials to obtain first: Original between-arm change differences, models/units and CI/criterion tables
Further research: Material reporting definitions/intervals and importance of original between-arm outcomes
Remaining uncertainty: Adjustment, dispersion/CI, aggregation/clustering/repeated measurements and clinical-importance criteria are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the level of the original 0.41-point difference in change?" to the corresponding original record. Adjustment, dispersion/CI, aggregation/clustering/repeated measurements and clinical-importance criteria are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the level of the original 0.41-point difference in change?
Application exceptions: Use 0.41 points only as the original value; do not derive final-value differences, change ratios or new CIs.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E04, E05, C06

Related sources R01

N19 · What are between-arm P=0.003 and the effect interval?

Current findings: The evidence list records between-arm P=0.003 and the existing English text records P=.003. These are retained alongside the original direction of ICDAS changes; P is distinguished from effect size/intervals.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Original tests/models, CIs, dispersion, multiplicity, measurement/analysis units and importance are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Original tests/models, CIs, dispersion, multiplicity, measurement/analysis units and importance are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original statistical methods, test targets, effects/CIs and unit material
Materials to obtain first: Original statistical methods, test targets, effects/CIs and unit material
Further research: Original result tables linking actual models/intervals and testing objectives
Remaining uncertainty: Original tests/models, CIs, dispersion, multiplicity, measurement/analysis units and importance are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are between-arm P=0.003 and the effect interval?" to the corresponding original record. Original tests/models, CIs, dispersion, multiplicity, measurement/analysis units and importance are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are between-arm P=0.003 and the effect interval?
Application exceptions: Do not newly infer guaranteed individual remineralization, reduced caries or all forms of importance/clinical superiority from P=.003 alone.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E05, E04

Related sources R01

N20 · What are score aggregation, models and within-arm/between-arm analyses?

Current findings: The original records ICDAS baseline/final values, changes and between-arm P. The summary does not explain models for score means, categories/stages or patient/lesion aggregation.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Scale treatment, aggregation, baseline adjustment, clustering/repeated measurements, analysis assumptions, sensitivity and change dispersion are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Scale treatment, aggregation, baseline adjustment, clustering/repeated measurements, analysis assumptions, sensitivity and change dispersion are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original score aggregation/statistical methods, SAP, models/units and tables
Materials to obtain first: Original score aggregation/statistical methods, SAP, models/units and tables
Further research: Material specifying original ICDAS analysis with units, models and assumptions
Remaining uncertainty: Scale treatment, aggregation, baseline adjustment, clustering/repeated measurements, analysis assumptions, sensitivity and change dispersion are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are score aggregation, models and within-arm/between-arm analyses?" to the corresponding original record. Scale treatment, aggregation, baseline adjustment, clustering/repeated measurements, analysis assumptions, sensitivity and change dispersion are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are score aggregation, models and within-arm/between-arm analyses?
Application exceptions: Do not arbitrarily declare scores interval-scaled/normally distributed or models, adjustment or clustering not applicable.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E04, C06

Related sources R01

N21 · How do completer effects differ from effects in the full randomized population?

Current findings: The original main result is a 91/106 completer analysis; the parent verdict historically described this defect as avoidable through ITT/missing-data handling. Actual ITT results were not provided.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Allocation/adherence effects, completion selection, arm-specific exclusions and original ITT/sensitivity outcomes are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Allocation/adherence effects, completion selection, arm-specific exclusions and original ITT/sensitivity outcomes are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original analysis populations, completion/exclusions, missing-data assumptions and alternative analyses
Materials to obtain first: Original analysis populations, completion/exclusions, missing-data assumptions and alternative analyses
Further research: Material reporting randomized/completer populations and the actual scope of missing data
Remaining uncertainty: Allocation/adherence effects, completion selection, arm-specific exclusions and original ITT/sensitivity outcomes are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "How do completer effects differ from effects in the full randomized population?" to the corresponding original record. Allocation/adherence effects, completion selection, arm-specific exclusions and original ITT/sensitivity outcomes are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: How do completer effects differ from effects in the full randomized population?
Application exceptions: Do not turn completer analysis into full-population ITT or create new ITT values/bias magnitudes from the parent's explanation of avoidability.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E04, C07

Related sources R01

N22 · What are the reported intervals and criteria for an important ICDAS difference?

Current findings: Original changes/differences and P are retained. Although ICDAS is lower-is-better, the summary lacks justified important-difference/patient-utility criteria and CIs.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Minimum important differences, stage/lesion-recovery criteria, intervals/dispersion and power/original plans are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Minimum important differences, stage/lesion-recovery criteria, intervals/dispersion and power/original plans are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original importance/clinical-linkage criteria, effect intervals and planning assumptions
Materials to obtain first: Original importance/clinical-linkage criteria, effect intervals and planning assumptions
Further research: If justified original criteria are provided, link them with score differences/intervals
Remaining uncertainty: Minimum important differences, stage/lesion-recovery criteria, intervals/dispersion and power/original plans are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the reported intervals and criteria for an important ICDAS difference?" to the corresponding original record. Minimum important differences, stage/lesion-recovery criteria, intervals/dispersion and power/original plans are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the reported intervals and criteria for an important ICDAS difference?
Application exceptions: Do not automatically use 0.41 points, statistical positivity or parent C50 as criteria establishing patient-important effects.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E05, E09

Related sources R01

N23 · What do registration 'Not confirmed', prespecification and plans mean?

Current findings: The existing registration identifier record is the string 'Not confirmed'. The current registration ID remains null; this original record and unverified scope are retained.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Registration/protocol/SAP, original primary/secondary outcomes, analyses/times and change history are externally unread. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Registration/protocol/SAP, original primary/secondary outcomes, analyses/times and change history are externally unread.
Required materials and conditions: Original registration/plans, endpoints/times, analysis versions and change material
Materials to obtain first: Original registration/plans, endpoints/times, analysis versions and change material
Further research: If actual plans are provided, distinguish original unverified status from new additional events/comparison scope
Remaining uncertainty: Registration/protocol/SAP, original primary/secondary outcomes, analyses/times and change history are externally unread.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What do registration 'Not confirmed', prespecification and plans mean?" to the corresponding original record. Registration/protocol/SAP, original primary/secondary outcomes, analyses/times and change history are externally unread.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What do registration 'Not confirmed', prespecification and plans mean?
Application exceptions: Do not convert 'Not confirmed' into unregistered/no registration, access failure or confirmed selective reporting.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E06, C09

Related sources R01

N24 · What is the scope of multiplicity and disclosure of all outcomes/times?

Current findings: The original material contains six-month ICDAS, adverse-effect reporting and unmeasured caries context. It does not provide a complete primary/secondary endpoint, time or analysis list.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Full outcome lists, multiplicity adjustment, exploratory/confirmatory status, prespecified analyses/changes and unpublished outcomes are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Full outcome lists, multiplicity adjustment, exploratory/confirmatory status, prespecified analyses/changes and unpublished outcomes are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Protocol/SAP, all outcomes/times and reporting/change tables
Materials to obtain first: Protocol/SAP, all outcomes/times and reporting/change tables
Further research: Material linking original plans and reports by outcome
Remaining uncertainty: Full outcome lists, multiplicity adjustment, exploratory/confirmatory status, prespecified analyses/changes and unpublished outcomes are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the scope of multiplicity and disclosure of all outcomes/times?" to the corresponding original record. Full outcome lists, multiplicity adjustment, exploratory/confirmatory status, prespecified analyses/changes and unpublished outcomes are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the scope of multiplicity and disclosure of all outcomes/times?
Application exceptions: Do not certify that all endpoints/times match plans or that selective reporting is absent from P=.003 and a single report.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E06, C08

Related sources R01

N25 · What are the original verdict and unmeasured scope for sibling caries prevention?

Current findings: The caries-prevention sheet concerns 'Prevention of incident caries', with grade '?' and the note 'Not measured'. The parent verdict states that reduced new caries/filling treatment was not measured.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Original clinical-event definitions/collection, long-term outcomes, registration plans and current related material were not verified in this work. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Original clinical-event definitions/collection, long-term outcomes, registration plans and current related material were not verified in this work.
Required materials and conditions: The same trial's outcome list and direct clinical-event material for the prevention question
Materials to obtain first: The same trial's outcome list and direct clinical-event material for the prevention question
Further research: If direct event material is provided, distinguish connections for remineralization from separate questions/scopes
Remaining uncertainty: Original clinical-event definitions/collection, long-term outcomes, registration plans and current related material were not verified in this work.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the original verdict and unmeasured scope for sibling caries prevention?" to the corresponding original record. Original clinical-event definitions/collection, long-term outcomes, registration plans and current related material were not verified in this work.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the original verdict and unmeasured scope for sibling caries prevention?
Application exceptions: Do not turn the sibling '?' into D or upgrade the original unmeasured description to zero prevention studies worldwide, zero effect or current full-text verification.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E09, C08

Related sources R01

N26 · Does ICDAS remineralization also answer questions about new caries, fillings or tooth loss?

Current findings: The selected outcome is a lesion-score surrogate. The existing core explanation/counterview states that improved scores cannot be transferred to reduced caries incidence or filling treatment.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Direct clinical-event effects, units/denominators, duration, surrogate prediction/mediation and long-term material are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Direct clinical-event effects, units/denominators, duration, surrogate prediction/mediation and long-term material are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Direct definitions, denominators and durations for new caries/treatment and tooth outcomes, with related validation
Materials to obtain first: Direct definitions, denominators and durations for new caries/treatment and tooth outcomes, with related validation
Further research: If appropriate direct event material is provided, link scores and clinical outcomes separately
Remaining uncertainty: Direct clinical-event effects, units/denominators, duration, surrogate prediction/mediation and long-term material are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Does ICDAS remineralization also answer questions about new caries, fillings or tooth loss?" to the corresponding original record. Direct clinical-event effects, units/denominators, duration, surrogate prediction/mediation and long-term material are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Does ICDAS remineralization also answer questions about new caries, fillings or tooth loss?
Application exceptions: Do not extend positive remineralization/lesion scores to established caries prevention, avoidance of filling treatment or all dental-health benefits.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E09, E08

Related sources R01

N27 · Are visual improvement and benefits in patient appearance/daily life the same?

Current findings: The existing counterview states that visual/score-based remineralization may be useful to patients. It does not provide direct patient satisfaction, appearance/pain or quality-of-life values.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Patient-reported appearance/satisfaction, daily life/quality of life, symptoms, persistence, importance and denominators are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Patient-reported appearance/satisfaction, daily life/quality of life, symptoms, persistence, importance and denominators are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Patient-centered outcomes/scales, definitions, denominators/times and original results
Materials to obtain first: Patient-centered outcomes/scales, definitions, denominators/times and original results
Further research: If material directly reporting patient-centered outcomes is provided, distinguish it from lesion scores
Remaining uncertainty: Patient-reported appearance/satisfaction, daily life/quality of life, symptoms, persistence, importance and denominators are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Are visual improvement and benefits in patient appearance/daily life the same?" to the corresponding original record. Patient-reported appearance/satisfaction, daily life/quality of life, symptoms, persistence, importance and denominators are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Are visual improvement and benefits in patient appearance/daily life the same?
Application exceptions: Do not turn the original possibility of usefulness into verified patient satisfaction, daily-life improvement or cosmetic effects.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E09, E08

Related sources R01

N28 · What are the concurrent or alternative effects of hygiene, fluoride, diet and retainers?

Current findings: The original comparison concerns lesion-score changes with F-ACP mousse/Essix. The summary lacks actual balance in basic oral care, other products/diet and natural recovery.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Arm-specific concurrent fluoride/toothpaste, diet/hygiene, retainers, natural course, intervention/assessment differences and handling methods are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Arm-specific concurrent fluoride/toothpaste, diet/hygiene, retainers, natural course, intervention/assessment differences and handling methods are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Control/concurrent treatment, actual behavior/adherence and original baseline/analysis material
Materials to obtain first: Control/concurrent treatment, actual behavior/adherence and original baseline/analysis material
Further research: Material linking common/different exposures and the original effect of interest in the same randomized comparison
Remaining uncertainty: Arm-specific concurrent fluoride/toothpaste, diet/hygiene, retainers, natural course, intervention/assessment differences and handling methods are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the concurrent or alternative effects of hygiene, fluoride, diet and retainers?" to the corresponding original record. Arm-specific concurrent fluoride/toothpaste, diet/hygiene, retainers, natural course, intervention/assessment differences and handling methods are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the concurrent or alternative effects of hygiene, fluoride, diet and retainers?
Application exceptions: Do not declare all care identical or other causes absent from missing information, or generate oral-care instructions for users.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E02, H05

Related sources R01

N29 · What are actual adherence, discontinuations and duration/dose comparisons?

Current findings: Six-month mousse exposure inside Essix is a nominal research condition. Actual individual adherence, dose reduction/discontinuation and direct comparisons of other durations/products are not separately provided.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Adherence measurement/distribution, discontinuations/changes, actual contact/amount and direct frequency/duration/formulation comparisons are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Adherence measurement/distribution, discontinuations/changes, actual contact/amount and direct frequency/duration/formulation comparisons are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original adherence/changes, exposure and direct-comparison/SAP material
Materials to obtain first: Original adherence/changes, exposure and direct-comparison/SAP material
Further research: Material distinguishing direct exposure-specific outcomes in the same or appropriate additional research
Remaining uncertainty: Adherence measurement/distribution, discontinuations/changes, actual contact/amount and direct frequency/duration/formulation comparisons are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are actual adherence, discontinuations and duration/dose comparisons?" to the corresponding original record. Adherence measurement/distribution, discontinuations/changes, actual contact/amount and direct frequency/duration/formulation comparisons are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are actual adherence, discontinuations and duration/dose comparisons?
Application exceptions: Do not turn nominal six-month exposure into optimal duration/frequency, retainer-care or product-use recommendations.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E02, E08

Related sources R01

N30 · What direct material addresses other populations, subgroups and long-term maintenance?

Current findings: The original is a six-month lesion-surrogate trial in post-orthodontic white spots. Other ages/lesion risks, during-orthodontic/non-orthodontic settings and persistence after stopping are separate questions.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Prespecified subgroups/interactions, direct population/product comparisons, longer follow-up and persistence after stopping are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Prespecified subgroups/interactions, direct population/product comparisons, longer follow-up and persistence after stopping are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Extended populations/exposures, prespecified subgroups and duration-specific direct outcomes
Materials to obtain first: Extended populations/exposures, prespecified subgroups and duration-specific direct outcomes
Further research: If additional material is provided, specify differences from original populations, exposures and times in the connection
Remaining uncertainty: Prespecified subgroups/interactions, direct population/product comparisons, longer follow-up and persistence after stopping are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What direct material addresses other populations, subgroups and long-term maintenance?" to the corresponding original record. Prespecified subgroups/interactions, direct population/product comparisons, longer follow-up and persistence after stopping are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What direct material addresses other populations, subgroups and long-term maintenance?
Application exceptions: Prespecified subgroups/interactions, direct population/product comparisons, longer follow-up and persistence after stopping are unverified. This gap is retained with the preservation scope, without new numbers, calculations or reassessment.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E08, E07

Related sources R01

N31 · Do single-trial/R1/I1 history and current independent replication differ?

Current findings: The parent records a small single trial and R1/I1 in the original verdict. The 1 evidence/citation slot, patients/teeth/lesions and two siblings are not current independent replications.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Current additional/follow-up reports, direct replication in other populations/products and material-family/independence relationships were not newly searched. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Current additional/follow-up reports, direct replication in other populations/products and material-family/independence relationships were not newly searched.
Required materials and conditions: Report/trial/population, product/source and outcome relationships, with direct independent material
Materials to obtain first: Report/trial/population, product/source and outcome relationships, with direct independent material
Further research: If material is provided, list same/separate/unclear populations and distinguish verification levels
Remaining uncertainty: Current additional/follow-up reports, direct replication in other populations/products and material-family/independence relationships were not newly searched.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Do single-trial/R1/I1 history and current independent replication differ?" to the corresponding original record. Current additional/follow-up reports, direct replication in other populations/products and material-family/independence relationships were not newly searched.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Do single-trial/R1/I1 history and current independent replication differ?
Application exceptions: Do not inherit a single trial/R1 and historical I1 as current worldwide trial counts or passed independence, or count outcomes/times as independent replications.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C02, E07, C10, H07

Related sources R01

N32 · What history is represented by the original small-study/completer and duration defect descriptions?

Current findings: The parent verdict records two listed defects: fewer than 200 participants and completer analysis. It explains that six months was not counted because it was not shorter than 12 weeks. This is parent-score/verdict history.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. These case-specific conditions did not automatically adopt the original 200 participants/12 weeks as minimum criteria or reassess them as new defect scores. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: These case-specific conditions did not automatically adopt the original 200 participants/12 weeks as minimum criteria or reassess them as new defect scores.
Required materials and conditions: Complete parent-verdict history and actual design/analysis material
Materials to obtain first: Complete parent-verdict history and actual design/analysis material
Further research: If corrections/method changes are provided, preserve original history separately from new events
Remaining uncertainty: These case-specific conditions did not automatically adopt the original 200 participants/12 weeks as minimum criteria or reassess them as new defect scores.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What history is represented by the original small-study/completer and duration defect descriptions?" to the corresponding original record. These case-specific conditions did not automatically adopt the original 200 participants/12 weeks as minimum criteria or reassess them as new defect scores.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What history is represented by the original small-study/completer and duration defect descriptions?
Application exceptions: Do not copy parent checklist criteria as universal participant/duration rules for new conditions, current completed review or reassessment.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C09, E04, E05

Related sources R01

N33 · What is the scope of no patient/guardian-reported adverse effects over six months?

Current findings: The existing safety description states that patients or guardians reported no adverse effects over six months. The original parent Good safety status is preserved separately from this reporting scope.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Event definitions, systematic/spontaneous collection, grades/discontinuations, original safety denominators and actual records/verification are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Event definitions, systematic/spontaneous collection, grades/discontinuations, original safety denominators and actual records/verification are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original adverse-effect reporting/collection, population/duration and definition/discontinuation material
Materials to obtain first: Original adverse-effect reporting/collection, population/duration and definition/discontinuation material
Further research: Original material specifying reporting methods and the actual safety scope for the same exposure
Remaining uncertainty: Event definitions, systematic/spontaneous collection, grades/discontinuations, original safety denominators and actual records/verification are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the scope of no patient/guardian-reported adverse effects over six months?" to the corresponding original record. Event definitions, systematic/spontaneous collection, grades/discontinuations, original safety denominators and actual records/verification are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the scope of no patient/guardian-reported adverse effects over six months?
Application exceptions: Do not extend a no-reports sentence to zero events of all kinds, complete collection, individual harmlessness or long-term safety certification.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions E10, H01, H09

Related sources R01

N34 · What are the adverse-effect denominators, dropout and reporting selection?

Current findings: The original 91/106 completers and 52/39 participants form the efficacy-analysis population. The summary does not distinguish whether patient/guardian adverse-effect reporting covered all randomized participants, completers or those actually exposed.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Safety populations, reporting/exposure/follow-up, events among dropouts, missing reports/recall and arm-specific detection differences are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Safety populations, reporting/exposure/follow-up, events among dropouts, missing reports/recall and arm-specific detection differences are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original safety-population/exposure, collection/missing reports and dropout/follow-up tables
Materials to obtain first: Original safety-population/exposure, collection/missing reports and dropout/follow-up tables
Further research: Safety material specifying denominators and reporting/follow-up selection
Remaining uncertainty: Safety populations, reporting/exposure/follow-up, events among dropouts, missing reports/recall and arm-specific detection differences are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the adverse-effect denominators, dropout and reporting selection?" to the corresponding original record. Safety populations, reporting/exposure/follow-up, events among dropouts, missing reports/recall and arm-specific detection differences are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the adverse-effect denominators, dropout and reporting selection?
Application exceptions: Do not fill verified safety denominators with the 91 efficacy participants or 106 randomized participants, or calculate new incidence/intervals from no reports.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions H04, H06, C07

Related sources R01

N35 · What are harm occurrence, discontinuation and exposure/follow-up times?

Current findings: The original safety-reporting window is six months. Actual mousse/retainer exposure, onset/recovery, discontinuation/reuse and subsequent observation require separate material.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Event chronology, actual contact duration, discontinuation/re-exposure, collection windows/original cutoff and loss to follow-up are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Event chronology, actual contact duration, discontinuation/re-exposure, collection windows/original cutoff and loss to follow-up are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original exposure/events, collection/discontinuation/recovery and timing material
Materials to obtain first: Original exposure/events, collection/discontinuation/recovery and timing material
Further research: Original material specifying actual time and safety follow-up for the same exposure
Remaining uncertainty: Event chronology, actual contact duration, discontinuation/re-exposure, collection windows/original cutoff and loss to follow-up are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are harm occurrence, discontinuation and exposure/follow-up times?" to the corresponding original record. Event chronology, actual contact duration, discontinuation/re-exposure, collection windows/original cutoff and loss to follow-up are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are harm occurrence, discontinuation and exposure/follow-up times?
Application exceptions: Do not transfer nominal six-month exposure/reporting to complete individual harm observation or future safety.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions H02, H04

Related sources R01

N36 · What are the harm or alternative causes involving ingredients, retainers and baseline conditions?

Current findings: The original exposure concerns fluoride/carbonate-containing F-ACP and Essix. The summary lacks contributions from other ingredients/retainers, baseline oral conditions/exposures and possible events.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: The required direct details were not verified within the current stored-summary and unread-external-material scope. Additives, baseline/concurrent conditions, other products, actual exposure, attribution/alternatives, vulnerable populations/long-term and rare harms are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Additives, baseline/concurrent conditions, other products, actual exposure, attribution/alternatives, vulnerable populations/long-term and rare harms are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original ingredients/products, baseline/concurrent conditions, event attribution and long-term/population-specific safety
Materials to obtain first: Original ingredients/products, baseline/concurrent conditions, event attribution and long-term/population-specific safety
Further research: If appropriate direct safety material is provided, distinguish differences from the original exposure/reporting scope
Remaining uncertainty: Additives, baseline/concurrent conditions, other products, actual exposure, attribution/alternatives, vulnerable populations/long-term and rare harms are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the harm or alternative causes involving ingredients, retainers and baseline conditions?" to the corresponding original record. Additives, baseline/concurrent conditions, other products, actual exposure, attribution/alternatives, vulnerable populations/long-term and rare harms are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the harm or alternative causes involving ingredients, retainers and baseline conditions?
Application exceptions: Do not exclude all events such as allergy/ingredient harms or generate product-suitability/use recommendations from no reports alone.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions H05, H08, E10

Related sources R01

N37 · What is the original funding statement about no external funding?

Current findings: The original evidence-list funding phrase 'This research received no external funding' and the Korean/English funding-check descriptions are retained. Original checked scope is distinguished from current reading.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Original contracts, institutional/internal funding, sponsor/author roles, complete COI and data access are externally unread. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Original contracts, institutional/internal funding, sponsor/author roles, complete COI and data access are externally unread.
Required materials and conditions: Original funding/resources, design/collection/analysis/publication roles and COI material
Materials to obtain first: Original funding/resources, design/collection/analysis/publication roles and COI material
Further research: If actual original declarations are provided, record checked levels/locations separately from unverified scope
Remaining uncertainty: Original contracts, institutional/internal funding, sponsor/author roles, complete COI and data access are externally unread.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What is the original funding statement about no external funding?" to the corresponding original record. Original contracts, institutional/internal funding, sponsor/author roles, complete COI and data access are externally unread.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What is the original funding statement about no external funding?
Application exceptions: Do not certify absence of all funding/product/company involvement or COI, or completed current independence from the no-external-funding quotation.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C10

Related sources R01

N38 · Does unverified product-provision wording differ from actual absence of provision?

Current findings: The original records that trial-product provision wording was not identified in the publicly checked COI/acknowledgments. Parent I1 represents that historical checked scope.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Complete product supply/in-kind support, author employment/patents, COI/acknowledgments, contracts and current changes are unverified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Complete product supply/in-kind support, author employment/patents, COI/acknowledgments, contracts and current changes are unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original product-provision/contracts, COI/acknowledgments and role declarations
Materials to obtain first: Original product-provision/contracts, COI/acknowledgments and role declarations
Further research: If original documents are provided, distinguish unverified/unreported status from the actual scope of provision/absence
Remaining uncertainty: Complete product supply/in-kind support, author employment/patents, COI/acknowledgments, contracts and current changes are unverified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Does unverified product-provision wording differ from actual absence of provision?" to the corresponding original record. Complete product supply/in-kind support, author employment/patents, COI/acknowledgments, contracts and current changes are unverified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Does unverified product-provision wording differ from actual absence of provision?
Application exceptions: Do not convert unconfirmed wording into no product provision, external access failure or current independence certification.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C10, C09

Related sources R01

N39 · What are the Korean/English texts, parent axes, false/null values and verdict history?

Current findings: The parent C50/Good status, axes B/S/R1/I1/E+/B2, unrecorded precision, false coprimary-split/large hard-endpoint RCT/no-human-study flags and empty override reasons are preserved as originally recorded. Korean/English texts, synthesis, grade decisions and cross-checking are historical context.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Original values/axes and historical checks were not inherited as current subclaim scores, condition fulfillment or completed review. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Original values/axes and historical checks were not inherited as current subclaim scores, condition fulfillment or completed review.
Required materials and conditions: Separate preservation of subclaim/parent, original languages/axes/empty values and verdict history
Materials to obtain first: Separate preservation of subclaim/parent, original languages/axes/empty values and verdict history
Further research: If actual corrections are provided, distinguish complete original text, events/versions and decisions by scope
Remaining uncertainty: Original values/axes and historical checks were not inherited as current subclaim scores, condition fulfillment or completed review.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the Korean/English texts, parent axes, false/null values and verdict history?" to the corresponding original record. Original values/axes and historical checks were not inherited as current subclaim scores, condition fulfillment or completed review.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the Korean/English texts, parent axes, false/null values and verdict history?
Application exceptions: Do not fill unrecorded precision with 0 or declare parent B2, historical checking/cross-checking as newly completed model review or subclaim scores.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C01, C09, E06

Related sources R01

N40 · Do the reference date, corrections/empty values differ from production dates/scope?

Current findings: The original reference date 2026-08-26, empty corrections/deliberation and the 2024 bibliography/unverified registration record are preserved. Current time belongs to a production event.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Evidence reference-date/classification records are absent, and no registration/correction/retraction, new search/material or link comparison was performed. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Evidence reference-date/classification records are absent, and no registration/correction/retraction, new search/material or link comparison was performed.
Required materials and conditions: Original publication/search/registration/correction versions and current production events
Materials to obtain first: Original publication/search/registration/correction versions and current production events
Further research: If material/corrections are actually provided, distinguish original scope, complete before/after text and new events
Remaining uncertainty: Evidence reference-date/classification records are absent, and no registration/correction/retraction, new search/material or link comparison was performed.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "Do the reference date, corrections/empty values differ from production dates/scope?" to the corresponding original record. Evidence reference-date/classification records are absent, and no registration/correction/retraction, new search/material or link comparison was performed.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: Do the reference date, corrections/empty values differ from production dates/scope?
Application exceptions: Do not borrow empty corrections/the original reference date as current absence of corrections or this work's review date, or label no search as zero studies.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions C09, C03

Related sources R01

N41 · What are the boundaries between score benefits/reported harms and current applicability/product selection?

Current findings: This sheet records ICDAS remineralization for the specified existing question and gaps in denominators/exposure, surrogates, safety and sponsorship in the same report. Individual dental products/use, treatment selection and current suitability are separate matters.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials not read
Why unverified: Some information from the stored summary was linked for production. Current products/guidelines, individual oral status, other compositions/controls and direct material on current benefit/harm applicability were not verified. Review of the existing content is incomplete; this does not certify fulfillment of clinical conditions, zero effect or absence of material.
Reason for missing information: Current products/guidelines, individual oral status, other compositions/controls and direct material on current benefit/harm applicability were not verified.
Required materials and conditions: Direct material for extended populations/exposures, clinical events/patient outcomes and harms, with applicability differences
Materials to obtain first: Direct material for extended populations/exposures, clinical events/patient outcomes and harms, with applicability differences
Further research: If material is provided and the scope allows, update research gaps while distinguishing the original sheet from other applicability questions
Remaining uncertainty: Current products/guidelines, individual oral status, other compositions/controls and direct material on current benefit/harm applicability were not verified.
Conditions for verification: Link the original values, definitions, units, denominators, timing, checked scope and unverified details for "What are the boundaries between score benefits/reported harms and current applicability/product selection?" to the corresponding original record. Current products/guidelines, individual oral status, other compositions/controls and direct material on current benefit/harm applicability were not verified.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to record the scope of the selected ICDAS remineralization question separately: What are the boundaries between score benefits/reported harms and current applicability/product selection?
Application exceptions: Do not extend C/positive scores, the original Good status or no reported adverse effects to caries prevention/daily-life benefits, individual safety/suitability or product-use/selection/administration recommendations.
Referenced methods: Chamgap's question-specific condition referring to the relevant stored summary record and family definitions H09, E09, E08, C09

Related sources R01