Question · asked by 1 review

GERD vs Healthy individuals without reflux (controls): Dental caries

Population
Adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)
Intervention
GERD
Comparison
Healthy individuals without reflux (controls)
Outcome
Dental caries

Reflux appears associated with a higher prevalence of dental caries than in healthy individuals based on three studies, though to a lesser extent than erosion; evidence is ungraded and not pooled.

What each review found

Current versions only
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
GERD vs Healthy individuals without reflux (controls)
Dental caries (Decayed Missing Filled index) · Adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) · Adult patients in gastroenterology, ENT and dental clinical settings
Reflux appears associated with a higher prevalence of dental caries than in healthy individuals based on three studies, though to a lesser extent than erosion; evidence is ungraded and not pooled.
Laryngopharyngeal reflux, gastroesophageal reflux and dental disorders: A systematic review. (2020) All outcomes
Three studies reported higher decayed-missing-filled index scores or a positive association between GERD and caries compared with controls (Yoshikawa, Song, Watanabe); no pooled estimate.3 studiesGRADE not reported

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Laryngopharyngeal reflux, gastroesophageal reflux and dental disorders: A systematic review.
2020 All outcomes
January 1990 to December 2019 (publication period searched)24Not applicable

The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.

Studies behind the findings

The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.

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.