Autism spectrum disorder vs Healthy school-aged children (for some measures): Oral health status and oral-care challenges
Two studies found high caries (77%) and gingivitis and considerable oral-care challenges among children with autism spectrum disorder, with low restorative indices (narrative synthesis; not GRADE-rated).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Autism spectrum disorder (oral health status and dental-care access) vs Healthy school-aged children (for some measures) Oral health status and oral-care challenges · Children with autism spectrum disorder in the United Arab Emirates (Dubai) · Dubai, UAE Two studies found high caries (77%) and gingivitis and considerable oral-care challenges among children with autism spectrum disorder, with low restorative indices (narrative synthesis; not GRADE-rated). Oral Health of Children and Adolescents in the United Arab Emirates: A Systematic Review of the Past Decade. (2021) All outcomes | Jaber et al. reported dental caries in 77% of children with ASD (mean dmft 2.2 in early mixed dentition), gingivitis in all children (generalized 70.4%), mostly poor oral hygiene (59%), and low met-need/restorative… | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oral Health of Children and Adolescents in the United Arab Emirates: A Systematic Review of the Past Decade. 2021 All outcomes | May 4, 2021 | 42 | Not applicable |
Studies behind the findings
The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.
- Oral health status and dental needs of autistic children and young adults · 2010 · included by 1 of these review
- Mansoor 2018 · included by 1 of these review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.