Question · asked by 1 review
Genetically predicted periodontitis vs Lower genetically predicted periodontitis liability, adjusted for DMFS: Lumbar spine and pelvis fracture
- Population
- European GWAS participants
- Intervention
- Genetically predicted periodontitis
- Comparison
- Lower genetically predicted periodontitis liability, adjusted for DMFS
- Outcome
- Lumbar spine and pelvis fracture
The MVMR MR-Egger interval included the null.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Genetically predicted periodontitis vs Lower genetically predicted periodontitis liability, adjusted for DMFS Lumbar spine and pelvis fracture · European GWAS participants · Summary-level GWAS, MVMR MR-Egger The MVMR MR-Egger interval included the null. From teeth to bone: dental caries has causal effects on osteoporosis and osteoporotic fracture. (2025) All outcomes | OR 1.062 [0.991, 1.137] | 490700 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| From teeth to bone: dental caries has causal effects on osteoporosis and osteoporotic fracture. 2025 All outcomes | Not applicable (secondary analysis of published GWAS summary statistics) | 3 | Not applicable |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Genetically predicted periodontitis vs Lower genetically predicted periodontitis liability · European GWAS participants · 1 review
- Genetically predicted periodontitis vs Lower genetically predicted periodontitis liability · European-ancestry adults · 1 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.