Systemic sclerosis (SSc / scleroderma) vs SSc-free individuals (controls): DMFT/DMFS index (dental caries experience)
No statistically significant difference in DMFT index between SSc patients and controls (SMD -0.03, CI includes 0); certainty ungraded.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Systemic sclerosis (SSc / scleroderma) vs SSc-free individuals (controls) DMFT index · Adults (general and hospital populations assessed in case-control studies) · Hospital/clinic-based case-control studies from Asia, America and Europe No statistically significant difference in DMFT index between SSc patients and controls (SMD -0.03, CI includes 0); certainty ungraded. Oral manifestations of patients with systemic sclerosis: a meta-analysis for case-controlled studies. (2021) All outcomes | SMD -0.025 [-0.296, 0.247] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oral manifestations of patients with systemic sclerosis: a meta-analysis for case-controlled studies. 2021 All outcomes | 2020-07 | 12 | Not applicable |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
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.