Question · asked by 1 review

Early extraction of a compromised mandibular first permanent molar vs Contralateral non-extraction side (same patient): Development and eruption of the third molar

Population
Children aged 5 to 15 years with a compromised first permanent molar
Intervention
Early extraction of a compromised mandibular first permanent molar
Comparison
Contralateral non-extraction side (same patient)
Outcome
Development and eruption of the third molar

Development and eruption of the third molar appeared accelerated after early first permanent molar extraction in two studies (e.g., eruption OR 2.86, 95% CI 1.37 to 5.96); ungraded.

What each review found

Current versions only
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Early extraction of a compromised mandibular first permanent molar vs Contralateral non-extraction side (same patient)
Development and eruption of the third molar · Children aged 5 to 15 years with a compromised first permanent molar · Hospital-based oral surgery and orthodontic departments (Turkey)
Development and eruption of the third molar appeared accelerated after early first permanent molar extraction in two studies (e.g., eruption OR 2.86, 95% CI 1.37 to 5.96); ungraded.
Consequences of early extraction of compromised first permanent molar: a systematic review. (2018) All outcomes
OR 2.86 [1.37, 5.96]2 studiesGRADE not reported

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Consequences of early extraction of compromised first permanent molar: a systematic review.
2018 All outcomes
May 2015 to 2017 (literature from 1960 to 2017)19Critically Low / Critically Low

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.

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.