Oral-health promotion programs (OHPPs): community-based oral-health education/training, supervised toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste and topical fluoride, dental screening, and dietary advice vs No oral health promotion program: Oral health-related quality of life
Oral health promotion programs have a positive effect on OHRQoL in adolescents (narrative synthesis; low methodological quality of included evidence; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Oral health promotion programs vs No oral health promotion program Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) · Adolescents (10-19 years) · Community/school/clinic settings; adolescents 10-19 years; included reviews conducted in multiple countries Oral health promotion programs have a positive effect on OHRQoL in adolescents (narrative synthesis; low methodological quality of included evidence; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating). Oral-health-related quality of life in adolescents: umbrella review. (2023) All outcomes | It was observed that health promotion programs have a positive effect on OHRQoL. Studies showed positive effects of OHPP on adolescentes OHRQoL with low methodological quality [38]. | Not reported | GRADE not reported |
Oral health promotion programs vs No oral health promotion program Oral health-related quality of life · Adolescents aged 10-19 years The umbrella review reported positive effects of oral health promotion programs on oral health-related quality of life. Oral-health-related quality of life in adolescents: umbrella review. (2023) All outcomes | no estimate extracted | Not reported | 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-related quality of life in adolescents: umbrella review. 2023 All outcomes | January 2022 | 22 | Not applicable |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
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.