Question · asked by 1 review
T allele of AMELX rs17878486 vs C allele: Dental caries susceptibility
- Population
- Ethnicity: Caucasian (n=2) individuals with caries/high caries and controls
- Intervention
- T allele of AMELX rs17878486
- Comparison
- C allele
- Outcome
- Dental caries susceptibility
The pooled odds ratio was 2.87 (95% CI 0.35 to 23.23).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
AMELX rs17878486 T allele vs C allele Dental caries susceptibility · Ethnicity: Caucasian (n=2) individuals with caries/high caries and controls · Ethnicity: Caucasian (n=2) The pooled odds ratio was 2.87 (95% CI 0.35 to 23.23). Association of LTF, ENAM, and AMELX polymorphisms with dental caries susceptibility: a meta-analysis. (2020) All outcomes | OR 2.87 [0.35, 23.23] | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Association of LTF, ENAM, and AMELX polymorphisms with dental caries susceptibility: a meta-analysis. 2020 All outcomes | Up to October 2019 | 16 | Not applicable |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- T allele of AMELX rs17878486 vs C allele of AMELX rs17878486 · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or… · 1 review
- T allele of AMELX rs17878486 vs C allele · Ethnicity: Asian (n=1) individuals with caries/high caries and controls · 1 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.