Good brushing habits (>=2 daily tooth brushing) vs Children without dental caries: Dental caries
- Population
- Children (deciduous and/or permanent dentition) in low- and middle-income countries
- Intervention
- Good brushing habits (>=2 daily tooth brushing)
- Comparison
- Children without dental caries
- Outcome
- Dental caries
Good brushing habits (>=2 daily) were associated with 35% lower odds of dental caries (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.92; 7 studies; not GRADE-rated).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Good brushing habits (>=2 daily tooth brushing) vs Children without dental caries Dental caries (association with good/>=2 daily brushing) · Children (deciduous and/or permanent dentition) in low- and middle-income countries · Low- and middle-income countries (Brazil, Nigeria, Cambodia, Tanzania, Mexico, Ethiopia) Good brushing habits (>=2 daily) were associated with 35% lower odds of dental caries (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.92; 7 studies; not GRADE-rated). Individual, Family, and Socioeconomic Contributors to Dental Caries in Children from Low- and Middle-Income… (2022) All outcomes | OR 0.65 [0.46, 0.92] | 7 studies · 5446 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Individual, Family, and Socioeconomic Contributors to Dental Caries in Children from Low- and Middle-Income Countries. 2022 All outcomes | March 2022 (all databases searched 11 March 2022; MEDLINE 1946 to 11 March 2022; CINAHL 1937 to 11 March 2022) | 11 | Not applicable |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Good brushing habits (>=2 daily tooth brushing) vs Brushing less than daily · Children aged 5-6 years in Ajman schools · 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.