Question · asked by 1 review

Prenatal vitamin D deficiency (low maternal 25(OH)D during pregnancy) vs Adequate prenatal vitamin D (sufficient maternal 25(OH)D): Dental caries in children

Population
Children aged 4 to 6 years whose mothers' prenatal vitamin D status was assessed
Intervention
Prenatal vitamin D deficiency (low maternal 25(OH)D during pregnancy)
Comparison
Adequate prenatal vitamin D (sufficient maternal 25(OH)D)
Outcome
Dental caries in children

Among children aged 4-6 years, prenatal vitamin D deficiency is associated with significantly higher odds of dental caries (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.32-1.56); ungraded.

What each review found

Current versions only
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Prenatal vitamin D deficiency (low maternal 25(OH)D during pregnancy) vs Adequate prenatal vitamin D (sufficient maternal 25(OH)D)
Dental caries in children · Children aged 4 to 6 years whose mothers' prenatal vitamin D status was assessed · Prenatal exposure; dental caries at 4 to 6 years, Observational pregnancy/birth-cohort studies (one cross-sectional), mostly in developed countries (USA, Canada, Japan, Australia, Spain, Netherlands, Poland, New Zealand, Turkey), Children's age subgroup: 4 to 6 years
Among children aged 4-6 years, prenatal vitamin D deficiency is associated with significantly higher odds of dental caries (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.32-1.56); ungraded.
Association between prenatal vitamin D deficiency with dental caries in infants and children: a systematic… (2024) All outcomes
OR 1.44 [1.32, 1.56]8 studiesGRADE not reported

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

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Association between prenatal vitamin D deficiency with dental caries in infants and children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
2024 All outcomes
5 October 2023 (search range 2000 to October 2023)16Not applicable

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

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.