Question · asked by 1 review
Oral cancer patients (cases) vs Healthy controls: Dental caries
- Population
- Adults in case-control studies (oral cancer patients vs healthy controls)
- Intervention
- Oral cancer patients (cases)
- Comparison
- Healthy controls
- Outcome
- Dental caries
The DMFT index was significantly higher in oral cancer patients than controls (SMD 0.65, 95% CI 0.12-1.18); ungraded.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Oral cancer patients (cases) vs Healthy controls DMFT index in OC cases vs controls · Adults in case-control studies (oral cancer patients vs healthy controls) · Not specified, Case-control studies conducted in Asia (n=6), Europe (n=5), USA (n=2) and other countries (n=3), DMFT (decayed, missing, filled teeth) The DMFT index was significantly higher in oral cancer patients than controls (SMD 0.65, 95% CI 0.12-1.18); ungraded. Periodontitis and the risk of oral cancer: a meta-analysis of case-control studies. (2024) All outcomes | SMD 0.65 [0.12, 1.18] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Periodontitis and the risk of oral cancer: a meta-analysis of case-control studies. 2024 All outcomes | Up to September 2023 (databases from inception) | 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.