Question · asked by 1 review
Pulp and periapical diseases vs Without pulp and periapical diseases: Lacunar stroke
- Population
- adults
- Intervention
- Pulp and periapical diseases
- Comparison
- Without pulp and periapical diseases
- Outcome
- Lacunar stroke
No eligible studies were found for the association between pulp and periapical diseases and lacunar stroke in the meta-analysis.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Pulp and periapical diseases vs Without pulp and periapical diseases Lacunar stroke · Adults No eligible studies were found for the association between pulp and periapical diseases and lacunar stroke in the meta-analysis. The contribution of oral infectious diseases in lacunar stroke based on meta-analysis and Mendelian… (2025) All outcomes | No studies addressing the association between pulp and periapical diseases and LS were identified. | 0 studies | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The contribution of oral infectious diseases in lacunar stroke based on meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization study. 2025 All outcomes | August 2024 | 10 | 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.