Question · asked by 1 review
Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 12-month recall: Periodontal disease
- Population
- Regular-attending primary-care dental patients aged 3, 16 or 18 years at entry (aged up to 20; low caries risk)
- Intervention
- Clinical examination with 24-month recall
- Comparison
- Clinical examination with 12-month recall
- Outcome
- Periodontal disease
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 12-month recall Periodontal disease · Regular-attending primary-care dental patients aged 3, 16 or 18 years at entry (aged up to 20; low caries risk) · 2 years The review found no eligible studies for this question. Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients (2020) · Cochrane All outcomes | Summary of findings 1 lists 'Periodontal disease: Not reported' for the 24-month versus 12-month comparison (Wang 1992 did not measure it). | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2020-01 | Not listed | Not assessed |
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.