Cdx-2(rs11568820) A allele / genotype vs G allele: Dental caries
- Population
- Children (<18 years) with vs without dental caries
- Intervention
- Cdx-2(rs11568820) A allele / genotype
- Comparison
- G allele
- Outcome
- Dental caries
Cdx-2(rs11568820) was reported by only one study and was not meta-analyzed; its association with caries risk is uncertain (ungraded).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Cdx-2(rs11568820) A allele / genotype vs G allele / reference genotype Dental caries · Children (<18 years) with vs without dental caries · Not meta-analyzed (single study), Children under 18 years; case-control and cross-sectional studies (China, Czech Republic, Turkey, Brazil, India) Cdx-2(rs11568820) was reported by only one study and was not meta-analyzed; its association with caries risk is uncertain (ungraded). Association of vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms with caries risk in children: a systematic review and… (2024) All outcomes | Cdx-2(rs11568820) was reported by only one study (Qin 2019; 303 caries, 245 caries-free) and was therefore not subjected to meta-analysis (Results 'Meta-analysis'; Table 6). | 1 study · 548 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Association of vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms with caries risk in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2024 All outcomes | 31 August 2022 | 10 | Not applicable |
Studies behind the findings
The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.
- Investigation of Interaction between Vitamin D Receptor Gene Polymorphisms and Environmental Factors in Early Childhood Caries in Chinese… · 2019 · included by 1 of these 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.