Question · asked by 1 review
Cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) vs No cleft lip and/or palate (non-CL/P): Care index (CI = f/[d+m+f]) in the primary dentition
- Population
- Children in the primary dentition with non-syndromic cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) and comparable children without CL/P
- Intervention
- Cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P)
- Comparison
- No cleft lip and/or palate (non-CL/P)
- Outcome
- Care index (CI = f/[d+m+f]) in the primary dentition
The care index tended to be higher in children without CL/P (2 of 3 studies), suggesting more extraction-based caries management in children with CL/P; not pooled (narrative; ungraded).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) vs No cleft lip and/or palate (non-CL/P) Care index (CI = f/[d+m+f]) in the primary dentition · Children in the primary dentition with non-syndromic cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) and comparable children without CL/P · Children with CL/P and comparable non-CL/P children across 12 countries (India, Brazil, China, Sweden, UK, USA, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Netherlands, Jordan, Thailand); studies published 1989-2021 The care index tended to be higher in children without CL/P (2 of 3 studies), suggesting more extraction-based caries management in children with CL/P; not pooled (narrative; ungraded). Caries in children with and without orofacial clefting: A systematic review and meta-analysis. (2022) All outcomes | Two out of three studies for which the CI could be calculated (Nagappan 2019; Veiga 2016) showed a higher CI for non-CL/P children demonstrating a higher proportion of extraction-based treatment in CL/P children… | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Caries in children with and without orofacial clefting: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2022 All outcomes | November 2021 (PubMed to Nov 2021; Scopus to Nov 2021; Cochrane CENTRAL to 2021; Web of Science only to June 2017) | 32 | Not applicable |
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.