Disability (developmental, intellectual, or sensory) vs Persons without disabilities: Dental caries prevalence and severity
- Population
- Persons with disabilities (children and adults with autism, Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, hearing impairment, or multiple disabilities) in Saudi Arabia
- Intervention
- Disability (developmental, intellectual, or sensory)
- Comparison
- Persons without disabilities
- Outcome
- Dental caries prevalence and severity
Dental caries prevalence and severity are high among persons with disabilities in Saudi Arabia (60% to over 80%), and the one comparative autism study reported significantly higher caries than controls; synthesized narratively (ungraded).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Disability (developmental, intellectual, or sensory) vs Persons without disabilities Dental caries prevalence and severity · Persons with disabilities (children and adults with autism, Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, hearing impairment, or… · Cross-sectional, Autism centres and dental/hospital settings in Saudi Arabia (Riyadh, Jeddah) Dental caries prevalence and severity are high among persons with disabilities in Saudi Arabia (60% to over 80%), and the one comparative autism study reported significantly higher caries than controls; synthesized narratively (ungraded). Disabilities and Disparities in Oral Health-Related Quality of Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis… (2024) All outcomes | Narrative synthesis (no pooled estimate). High dental caries burden among PWDs: caries prevalence 60% to over 80% (abstract). Alkahtani 2019 (hearing-impaired adults, single-arm): caries prevalence 82.2%, treatment… | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disabilities and Disparities in Oral Health-Related Quality of Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Saudi Arabia. 2024 All outcomes | 1 July 2024 (initial search); 25 September 2024 (last update) | 10 | Not applicable |
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.