Probiotics vs placebo or control: Salivary pH
Probiotics may make little to no difference to salivary pH versus control (MD -0.12 pH units, 95%CI -0.72 to 0.48; very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Probiotics (any strain, dose, or presentation), minimum intake duration 0.2 months vs No treatment or placebo (control) Salivary pH · Children and/or adolescents (<18 years) without background systemic disease · follow-up: mean 1.1 months, Healthy children and/or adolescents (<18 years) without systemic disease; RCTs from multiple countries (India, Thailand, Spain, Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Poland, Colombia, Saudi Arabia); mostly school/community and clinic settings, Overall (all presentations pooled) Probiotics may make little to no difference to salivary pH versus control (MD -0.12 pH units, 95%CI -0.72 to 0.48; very low certainty). Efficacy of Probiotic Consumption on Oral Outcomes in Children and/or Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis. (2024) All outcomes | MD -0.12 [-0.72, 0.48] | 3 studies · 137 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efficacy of Probiotic Consumption on Oral Outcomes in Children and/or Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis. 2024 All outcomes | March 15, 2023 | 19 | Critically Low / Critically Low |
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.
- A comparative evaluation of probiotic formulations in prevention of dental caries · 2021 · included by 1 of these review
- Effect of Green Tea Extract Mouthrinse and Probiotic Mouthrinse on Salivary pH in a Group of Schoolchildren: An In Vivo Study. · 2020 · included by 1 of these 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.