Question · asked by 1 review
Longitudinal follow-up over time (natural caries progression; no assigned intervention) vs Within-cohort change from baseline to follow-up (>=3 y): Annual decline in percentage of caries-free participants (permanent dentition, D3)
For low baseline caries experience, the annual decline in caries-free participants ranged 4.3% to 10.2% (9 studies; ungraded).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Longitudinal follow-up over time (natural caries progression; no assigned intervention) vs Within-cohort change from baseline to follow-up (>=3 y) Annual decline in percentage of caries-free participants (permanent dentition, D3) · Children and adolescents (permanent dentition, D3, up to 21 y), Western or comparable populations · Annual (studies with >=3 y follow-up), Western Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand (or comparable Western populations), Baseline caries experience: low For low baseline caries experience, the annual decline in caries-free participants ranged 4.3% to 10.2% (9 studies; ungraded). Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. (2019) All outcomes | 4.3% to 10.2% | 9 studies · 4811 participants | GRADE not reported |
Longitudinal follow-up over time (natural caries progression; no assigned intervention) vs Within-cohort change from baseline to follow-up (>=3 y) Annual decline in percentage of caries-free participants (permanent dentition, D3) · Children and adolescents (permanent dentition, D3, up to 21 y), Western or comparable populations · Annual (studies with >=3 y follow-up), Western Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand (or comparable Western populations) In the permanent dentition, the annual decline in caries-free participants ranged from 0.8% to 10.2% across 18 studies, and was smaller where baseline caries experience was higher (descriptive range; ungraded). Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. (2019) All outcomes | 0.8% to 10.2% | 18 studies · 12017 participants | GRADE not reported |
Longitudinal follow-up over time (natural caries progression; no assigned intervention) vs Within-cohort change from baseline to follow-up (>=3 y) Annual decline in percentage of caries-free participants (permanent dentition, D3) · Children and adolescents (permanent dentition, D3, up to 21 y), Western or comparable populations · Annual (studies with >=3 y follow-up), Western Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand (or comparable Western populations), Baseline caries experience: high For high baseline caries experience, the annual decline in caries-free participants ranged 0.8% to 2.2% (2 studies; ungraded). Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. (2019) All outcomes | 0.8% to 2.2% | 2 studies · 5029 participants | GRADE not reported |
Longitudinal follow-up over time (natural caries progression; no assigned intervention) vs Within-cohort change from baseline to follow-up (>=3 y) Annual decline in percentage of caries-free participants (permanent dentition, D3) · Children and adolescents (permanent dentition, D3, up to 21 y), Western or comparable populations · Annual (studies with >=3 y follow-up), Western Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand (or comparable Western populations), Baseline caries experience: moderate For moderate baseline caries experience, the annual decline in caries-free participants ranged 3.7% to 8.3% (4 studies; ungraded). Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. (2019) All outcomes | 3.7% to 8.3% | 4 studies · 928 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes | 16 April 2018 | 43 | 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.