Question · asked by 1 review
Postbiotic toothpaste vs Fluoride toothpaste alone: Salivary S. mutans level
- Population
- children aged 6 to 12 years
- Intervention
- Postbiotic toothpaste
- Comparison
- Fluoride toothpaste alone
- Outcome
- Salivary S. mutans level
No meta-analysis was conducted; the reduction in salivary Streptococcus mutans count versus fluoride toothpaste was reported as insignificant.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Postbiotic toothpaste vs Fluoride toothpaste Salivary Streptococcus mutans count · Children aged 6 to 12 years · 4 weeks, clinical setting No meta-analysis was conducted; the reduction in salivary Streptococcus mutans count versus fluoride toothpaste was reported as insignificant. Postbiotics and Dental Caries: A Systematic Review. (2025) All outcomes | no estimate extracted | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Postbiotics and Dental Caries: A Systematic Review. 2025 All outcomes | October 2024 | 21 | Critically Low / Critically Low |
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.