1055 to 1100 ppm F toothpaste vs 500 to 550 ppm F toothpaste: Proportion developing new caries
1055 to 1100 ppm F toothpaste may leads to lower proportion developing new caries compared with 500 to 550 ppm F toothpaste (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
1055 to 1100 ppm F toothpaste vs 500 to 550 ppm F toothpaste Proportion developing new caries · Young children with primary (deciduous) dentition (aged 1 to 6 years at study start) · 36 months 1055 to 1100 ppm F toothpaste may leads to lower proportion developing new caries compared with 500 to 550 ppm F toothpaste (low certainty). Fluoride toothpastes of different concentrations for preventing dental caries (2019) · Cochrane All outcomes | RR 0.86 [0.74, 0.99] | 1 study · 905 participants | Low |
1055 to 1100 ppm F toothpaste vs 500 to 550 ppm F toothpaste Proportion developing new caries · Young children with primary (deciduous) dentition (aged 1 to 6 years at study start) · 36 months 1055 to 1100 ppm F toothpaste led to lower proportion developing new caries compared with 500 to 550 ppm F toothpaste; GRADE not reported. Fluoride toothpastes of different concentrations for preventing dental caries (2010) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD007868.PUB2, superseded | RR 0.89 [0.80, 0.99] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fluoride toothpastes of different concentrations for preventing dental caries 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2018-08 | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
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.