Gap finder
Search review questions
Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.
5 questions in 5 reviews · intervention: Restorative materials · outcome domain: Adverse effects/fluorosis
current versionsNo studies 4 · 80%Ungraded 1 · 20%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Intervention categories, outcome domains and clusters are a proposed key pending human validation. Clear all filters
| Question | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Replacement of the defective restoration vs Repair of the defective restoration Composite: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 6: superficial discoloration · Dentists managing a defective direct resin composite restoration (posterior occlusal Class I; standardized vignette of… · Not applicable (single time-point survey, June to October 2023), Overall (all 21 countries pooled) Clinical Decision-Making of Repair vs. Replacement of Defective Direct Dental Restorations: A Multinational… (2025) | RR 0.28 [0.20, 0.38] | 21 studies · 3680 participants | Ungraded |
Adhesively bonded amalgam restorations in conventional preparations utilising deliberate retention (all bonding agents) vs Traditional non‐bonded amalgam restorations Adverse effects · Adults and adolescents with permanent posterior molar and premolar teeth suitable for Class I and II, but excluding… Adhesively bonded versus non‐bonded amalgam restorations for dental caries (2016) · Cochrane | Adverse effects: any event for which the causal relationship between the event and the amalgam restoration is at least a reasonable possibility - not measured | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | - | See… | 0 studies | No studies |
Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) Adverse events · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth · Medium term (less than 5 years) or long term (5 years and above) Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: resin composite (2014) · Cochrane | No randomised controlled trials were found | 0 studies | No studies |
Repair of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam) vs Replacement of a defective amalgam restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with amalgam) Adverse events · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective amalgam restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth · Medium term (less than 5 years) or long term (5 years and above) Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: amalgam (2014) · Cochrane | No randomised controlled trials were found | 0 studies | No studies |
Resin composite restorations (filling and bonding systems) containing antibacterial agents vs Composite restorations not containing antibacterial agents Adverse effects · Adults and adolescents in any age group with restorations in the permanent dentition and children with restorations in… Antibacterial agents in composite restorations for the prevention of dental caries (2013) · Cochrane | No studies were included in this review, as we were unable to find any trials directly comparing antibacterial containing composites to other active interventions or controls. | 0 studies | No studies |