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.
162 questions in 21 reviews · cluster CL0190
current versionsNo studies 28 · 17.3%Ungraded 98 · 60.5%Very low 27 · 16.7%Low 9 · 5.6%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 |
|---|---|---|---|
Diode laser, near infrared (700 nm to 850 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Short term (0 to 24 hours) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -2.62 [-5.61, 0.38] | 4 studies | Ungraded |
Er,Cr:YSGG laser (erbium,chromium:yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Long term (more than 2 months) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -5.19 [-5.50, -4.89] | 2 studies | Ungraded |
Diode laser, visible red (630 nm to 700 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Short term (0 to 24 hours) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -1.95 [-3.14, -0.76] | 4 studies | Ungraded |
Diode laser, visible red (630 nm to 700 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Long term (more than 2 months) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD 0.81 [-0.78, 2.40] | 1 study | Ungraded |
Diode laser, near infrared (850 nm to 980 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Medium term (24 hours to 2 months) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -2.30 [-2.86, -1.74] | 1 study | Ungraded |
CO2 laser (carbon dioxide) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Outcome NR · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | We did not find any eligible study to evaluate erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) or carbon dioxide (CO2) laser compared with placebo/no treatment. | 0 studies | No studies |
Diode laser, near infrared (700 nm to 850 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Short term (0 to 24 hours) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD 0.27 [-0.60, 1.14] | 2 studies | Ungraded |
In-office laser therapy (all types combined) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Short term (0 to 24 hours) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -0.67 [-1.31, -0.03] | 8 studies · 506 participants | Low |
Er,Cr:YSGG laser (erbium,chromium:yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Medium term (24 hours to 2 months) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD 0.38 [-0.13, 0.89] | 1 study | Ungraded |
Diode laser, near infrared (700 nm to 850 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Long term (more than 2 months) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -3.83 [-6.90, -0.77] | 2 studies | Ungraded |
Diode laser, near infrared (850 nm to 980 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Short term (0 to 24 hours) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -2.17 [-2.80, -1.54] | 1 study | Ungraded |
Nd:YAG laser (neodymium-doped:yttrium-aluminum-garnet) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Medium term (24 hours to 2 months) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD 0.42 [-0.97, 1.82] | 2 studies | Ungraded |
Diode laser, visible red (630 nm to 700 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Long term (more than 2 months) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -4.67 [-5.38, -3.96] | 2 studies | Ungraded |
Diode laser, visible red (630 nm to 700 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Short term (0 to 24 hours) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -0.81 [-1.16, -0.45] | 4 studies | Ungraded |
Diode laser, visible red (630 nm to 700 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Medium term (24 hours to 2 months) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -1.45 [-4.35, 1.44] | 4 studies | Ungraded |
Er,Cr:YSGG laser (erbium,chromium:yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation · Medium term (24 hours to 2 months) Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity (2021) · Cochrane | MD -4.90 [-5.21, -4.59] | 2 studies | Ungraded |
Subgingival laser irradiation + povidone-iodine vs SRP alone Volatile sulphur compounds (VSC) · Adolescents and adults aged over 16 years with clinical or self-assessed halitosis of oral origin; excluding induced… · 4 weeks Interventions for managing halitosis (2019) · Cochrane | MD 70.0 [63.88, 76.12] | 1 study · 40 participants | Ungraded |
Laser enamel preparation alone (Er,Cr:YSGG or CO2 laser) vs Acid-etching (phosphoric acid) Clinical (chair-side) time · Caries-free children to young adults with premolars/molars requiring pit-and-fissure sealants The clinical effects of laser preparation of tooth surfaces for fissure sealants placement: a systematic… (2019) | Walsh 1996 reported laser conditioning time of 7 s vs 70 s for acid preparation; Kumar 2016 reported Er,Cr:YSGG exposure ~10 s vs >35 s for acid etching; laser conditioning was shorter but times were not pooled, and… | 2 studies | Ungraded |
Laser (low-level laser) at P6 point vs Control (sham/dummy laser) Completion of dental treatment · People (older than four years) classified as having gagging that interfered with dental treatment; included trials… Management of gag reflex for patients undergoing dental treatment (2019) · Cochrane | Completion of dental treatment: none of the trials reported this outcome. | 0 studies | No studies |
SRP plus subgingival laser irradiation vs SRP alone Volatile sulphur compounds (VSC) · Adolescents and adults aged over 16 years with clinical or self-assessed halitosis of oral origin; excluding induced… · 4 weeks Interventions for managing halitosis (2019) · Cochrane | MD -3.3 [-9.38, 2.78] | 1 study · 40 participants | Ungraded |
Laser (low-level laser) at P6 point vs Control (sham/dummy laser) Reduction in gagging (assessor-reported) · People (older than four years) classified as having gagging that interfered with dental treatment; included trials… Management of gag reflex for patients undergoing dental treatment (2019) · Cochrane | MD 1.80 [1.53, 2.07] | 1 study · 25 participants | Very low |
Er:YAG laser preparation combined with acid-etching vs Acid-etching (phosphoric acid) alone Physiological stress indicators (heart rate, oxygen saturation) · Children (ages 6-12) receiving pit-and-fissure sealants The clinical effects of laser preparation of tooth surfaces for fissure sealants placement: a systematic… (2019) | Shindova 2018 (Er:YAG laser+acid vs acid-etching): no significant differences in heart rate or oxygen saturation between groups. | 1 study · 64 participants | Ungraded |
Laser (low-level laser) at P6 point vs Control (sham/dummy laser) Presence or absence of gagging · People (older than four years) classified as having gagging that interfered with dental treatment; included trials… Management of gag reflex for patients undergoing dental treatment (2019) · Cochrane | OR 86.33 [29.41, 253.45] | 1 study · 40 participants | Very low |
Subgingival laser irradiation + povidone-iodine vs SRP alone Dentist-reported organoleptic test (OLT) score (scale 0 to 5) · Adolescents and adults aged over 16 years with clinical or self-assessed halitosis of oral origin; excluding induced… · mean 4 weeks Interventions for managing halitosis (2019) · Cochrane | MD 0.49 [0.3, 0.68] | 1 study · 40 participants | Very low |
Er:YAG laser preparation combined with acid-etching vs Acid-etching (phosphoric acid) alone Dental anxiety (subjective and objective scores) · Children (ages 6-12) receiving pit-and-fissure sealants The clinical effects of laser preparation of tooth surfaces for fissure sealants placement: a systematic… (2019) | Shindova 2018 (Er:YAG laser+acid vs acid-etching): no significant difference between initial and final subjective anxiety scores for the two groups; use of the Er:YAG laser did not provoke anxiety (P > 0.05). | 1 study · 64 participants | Ungraded |
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide vs Formocresol (FC) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 7.00 [0.39, 124.83] | 1 study · 30 participants | Ungraded |
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) vs Formocresol (FC) Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 6 and 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | No clinical failure in any participant (Fernandes 2015); not estimable | 1 study · 30 participants | Ungraded |
Diode laser vs Electrosurgery Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 6 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.70] | 2 studies · 50 participants | Very low |
Low-level diode laser vs Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) Overall failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 4.00 [0.49, 32.72] | 1 study · 40 participants | Ungraded |
Erbium:YAG laser vs Formocresol (FC) Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 24 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 2.13 [0.20, 22.70] | 1 study · 97 participants | Ungraded |
Diode laser vs Ferric sulphate (FS) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 6 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 0.89 [0.38, 2.12] | 3 studies · 130 participants | Low |
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 6 and 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | No clinical failure in any participant (Fernandes 2015); not estimable | 1 study · 30 participants | Ungraded |
Diode laser vs Ferric sulphate (FS) Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 6 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 0.23 [0.04, 1.30] | 3 studies · 130 participants | Low |
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) vs Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 6 and 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | No clinical failure in any participant (Fernandes 2015); not estimable | 1 study · 30 participants | Ungraded |
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 0.50 [0.15, 1.64] | 1 study · 30 participants | Ungraded |
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) vs Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 1.00 [0.24, 4.18] | 1 study · 30 participants | Ungraded |
Diode laser + mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Formocresol (FC) + zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · mean 15.7 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 4.00 [0.48, 33.42] | 1 study · 52 participants | Ungraded |
Diode laser + mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Formocresol (FC) + zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE) Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · mean 15.7 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | No clinical failure in any participant (Saltzman 2005); not estimable | 1 study · 52 participants | Ungraded |
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 6 and 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 0.50 [0.15, 1.64] | 1 study · 30 participants | Ungraded |
Diode laser vs Formocresol (FC) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 2.00 [0.75, 5.33] | 1 study · 80 participants | Ungraded |
Erbium:YAG laser vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 24 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 0.62 [0.11, 3.56] | 1 study · 91 participants | Ungraded |
Erbium:YAG laser vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 24 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 0.31 [0.11, 0.90] | 1 study · 91 participants | Ungraded |
Erbium:YAG laser vs Ferric sulphate (FS) Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 24 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 5.31 [0.26, 107.86] | 1 study · 97 participants | Ungraded |
Erbium:YAG laser vs Ferric sulphate (FS) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 24 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 0.61 [0.19, 1.94] | 1 study · 97 participants | Ungraded |
Photodynamic therapy plus mechanical debridement vs Mechanical debridement alone Clinical attachment level (mm) · Adults treated for periodontitis and receiving supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) · 12 months Supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) for maintaining the dentition in adults treated for periodontitis (2018) · Cochrane | MD -0.97 [-3.51, 1.57] | 1 study · 10 participants | Very low |
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 6 and 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | No clinical failure in any participant (Fernandes 2015); not estimable | 1 study · 30 participants | Ungraded |
Photodynamic therapy plus mechanical debridement vs Mechanical debridement alone Tooth loss · Adults treated for periodontitis and receiving supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) Supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) for maintaining the dentition in adults treated for periodontitis (2018) · Cochrane | Not measured | 0 studies | No studies |
Diode laser vs Formocresol (FC) Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.95] | 1 study · 80 participants | Ungraded |
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide vs Formocresol (FC) Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 6 and 12 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | No clinical failure in any participant (Fernandes 2015); not estimable | 1 study · 30 participants | Ungraded |
Erbium:YAG laser vs Formocresol (FC) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 24 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane | RR 1.06 [0.28, 4.01] | 1 study · 97 participants | Ungraded |