Question · asked by 1 review

Passive tobacco exposure (prenatal maternal smoking or postnatal secondhand/household smoke) vs No passive tobacco exposure (non-exposed children): Dental caries

Population
Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)
Intervention
Passive tobacco exposure (prenatal maternal smoking or postnatal secondhand/household smoke)
Comparison
No passive tobacco exposure (non-exposed children)
Outcome
Dental caries

In children and adolescents, passive tobacco exposure (prenatal or postnatal) is associated with higher odds of dental caries (pooled OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.68; 21 studies), though heterogeneity was high (I2=86.5%); certainty of evidence not graded.

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Passive tobacco exposure (prenatal maternal smoking or postnatal secondhand/household smoke) vs No passive tobacco exposure (non-exposed children)
Dental caries (presence; primary or permanent dentition) · Children and adolescents (aged 0 to 19 years) · Community/population-based samples of children and adolescents (households, schools and clinics) across multiple countries; mostly cross-sectional surveys plus some cohort and case-control studies
In children and adolescents, passive tobacco exposure (prenatal or postnatal) is associated with higher odds of dental caries (pooled OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.68; 21 studies), though heterogeneity was high (I2=86.5%); certainty of evidence not graded.
Association between passive tobacco exposure and caries in children and adolescents. A systematic review and… (2018) All outcomes
OR 1.528 [1.394, 1.676]21 studiesGRADE not reported

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

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Association between passive tobacco exposure and caries in children and adolescents. A systematic review and meta-analysis.
2018 All outcomes
January 2000 to 2 March 201829Not applicable

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.