Question · asked by 1 review
Dental caries vs Caries-free status: Beta diversity and community composition
- Population
- Participants in oral 16S rRNA caries microbiome studies
- Intervention
- Dental caries
- Comparison
- Caries-free status
- Outcome
- Beta diversity and community composition
Beta-diversity matrices showed statistically significant ADONIS results, while clustering by study and 16S region was also observed; no pooled effect estimate was reported.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Dental caries vs Caries-free oral health Beta diversity and community composition · Participants in oral 16S rRNA caries microbiome studies · Human oral samples Beta-diversity matrices showed statistically significant ADONIS results, while clustering by study and 16S region was also observed; no pooled effect estimate was reported. Meta-analysis of caries microbiome studies can improve upon disease prediction outcomes. (2022) All outcomes | no estimate extracted | 19 studies · 2016 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Meta-analysis of caries microbiome studies can improve upon disease prediction outcomes. 2022 All outcomes | Not specified (studies published from 2012 onward included; no explicit search date reported) | 16 | 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.