Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) vs Children and adolescents without JIA (healthy peers): Developmental defects of enamel measured by any validated index
A single small study suggested developmental enamel defects were more frequent in children with JIA, but the evidence is insufficient (1 study; ungraded).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) vs Children and adolescents without JIA (healthy peers) Developmental enamel defects · Children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) · United Kingdom (Ahmed et al. 2004) A single small study suggested developmental enamel defects were more frequent in children with JIA, but the evidence is insufficient (1 study; ungraded). Oral health in children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis - a systematic review and… (2019) All outcomes | The only study reporting developmental enamel defects [22] found the condition more frequent among children with JIA than healthy peers, but the sample size was too small to draw any reliable conclusion. | 1 study · 110 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oral health in children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis - a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2019 All outcomes | 25 November 2018 | 20 | Not applicable |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
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.