Question · asked by 1 review
Silver diamine fluoride (SDF, including SDF + fluoride varnish) vs Other standard-of-care caries treatments pooled (placebo, ART, or ART + fluoride varnish): Oral health-related quality of life
- Population
- Children with dental caries
- Intervention
- Silver diamine fluoride (SDF, including SDF + fluoride varnish)
- Comparison
- Other standard-of-care caries treatments pooled (placebo, ART, or ART + fluoride varnish)
- Outcome
- Oral health-related quality of life
SDF had no significant effect on oral health-related quality of life versus pooled standard-of-care caries treatments (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.08; ungraded).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Silver diamine fluoride (SDF, including SDF + fluoride varnish) vs Other standard-of-care caries treatments pooled (placebo, ART, or ART + fluoride varnish) Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL; ECOHIS/COHIP) · Children with dental caries (ages ~2-13 years in the pooled trials) · Post-treatment (follow-up varied by trial), Pediatric dental care; trials conducted in China, the USA, and Brazil SDF had no significant effect on oral health-related quality of life versus pooled standard-of-care caries treatments (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.08; ungraded). Silver diamine fluoride and oral health-related quality of life: A review and network meta-analysis. (2022) All outcomes | SMD -0.06 [-0.20, 0.08] | 5 studies · 820 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Silver diamine fluoride and oral health-related quality of life: A review and network meta-analysis. 2022 All outcomes | 30 July 2021 | 10 | Critically Low / Critically Low |
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.