Question · asked by 1 review
38% silver diamine fluoride vs 12% SDF solution (applied annually): Arrest of advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface
- Population
- Preschool children with advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface (primary teeth)
- Intervention
- 38% silver diamine fluoride
- Comparison
- 12% SDF solution (applied annually)
- Outcome
- Arrest of advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface
38% SDF solution (applied annually) was more effective than 12% SDF solution (applied annually) for arrest or reversal of cavitated coronal carious lesions (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.4; high certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versionsNo studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 4 · 100%
| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
38% SDF solution (applied annually) vs 12% SDF solution (applied annually) Arrest of advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface · Preschool children with advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface (primary teeth) · 12 mo, Dental practice (professionally applied or prescribed nonrestorative caries treatments; parallel and split-mouth RCTs) 38% SDF solution (applied annually) was more effective than 12% SDF solution (applied annually) for arrest or reversal of cavitated coronal carious lesions (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.4; high certainty). Nonrestorative Treatments for Caries: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. (2019) All outcomes | RR 1.27 [1.16, 1.4] | 1 study · 799 participants | High |
38% SDF solution (applied annually) vs 12% SDF solution (applied annually) Arrest of advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface · Preschool children with advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface (primary teeth) · 24 mo, Dental practice (professionally applied or prescribed nonrestorative caries treatments; parallel and split-mouth RCTs) 38% SDF solution (applied annually) was more effective than 12% SDF solution (applied annually) for arrest or reversal of cavitated coronal carious lesions (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.28; high certainty). Nonrestorative Treatments for Caries: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. (2019) All outcomes | RR 1.19 [1.1, 1.28] | 1 study · 799 participants | High |
38% SDF solution (applied annually) vs 12% SDF solution (applied annually) Arrest of advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface · Preschool children with advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface (primary teeth) · 30 mo, Dental practice (professionally applied or prescribed nonrestorative caries treatments; parallel and split-mouth RCTs) 38% SDF solution (applied annually) was more effective than 12% SDF solution (applied annually) for arrest or reversal of cavitated coronal carious lesions (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.3; high certainty). Nonrestorative Treatments for Caries: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. (2019) All outcomes | RR 1.21 [1.13, 1.3] | 1 study · 799 participants | High |
38% SDF solution (applied annually) vs 12% SDF solution (applied annually) Arrest of advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface · Preschool children with advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface (primary teeth) · 18 mo, Dental practice (professionally applied or prescribed nonrestorative caries treatments; parallel and split-mouth RCTs) 38% SDF solution (applied annually) was more effective than 12% SDF solution (applied annually) for arrest or reversal of cavitated coronal carious lesions (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.38; high certainty). Nonrestorative Treatments for Caries: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. (2019) All outcomes | RR 1.27 [1.18, 1.38] | 1 study · 799 participants | High |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nonrestorative Treatments for Caries: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. 2019 All outcomes | June 2017 | 54 | Critically Low / Critically Low |
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.