Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

2,916 questions · 3,207 findings · 167 reviews · related questions CL0289

No studies found 596 · 18.6%GRADE not reported 1,666 · 51.9%Very low 603 · 18.8%Low 252 · 7.9%Moderate 78 · 2.4%High 12 · 0.4%

Lacebacks with fixed appliances vs Fixed appliances

Amount of crowding · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

It is very uncertain whether lacebacks with fixed appliances changes amount of crowding (change) at 6 months compared with fixed appliances only (control) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate) vs observation

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate) probably leads to higher molar expansion (inter-molar distance) compared with observation (no treatment) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intensive periodontal treatment (subgingival SRP with or without other periodontal treatment) vs No treatment (no periodontal treatment)

Heart rate · Adults (any age/sex) with chronic periodontitis (>=5 teeth remaining; PPD >4 mm), with or without hypertension

Periodontal treatment (subgingival SRP with or without other… showed no clear difference in heart rate compared with no treatment (no periodontal treatment); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with xenograft (bone graft) vs Extraction alone

Need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

It is very uncertain whether ARP with xenograft (bone graft) changes need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement compared with extraction alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with allograft (bone graft) vs ARP with xenograft

Need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

It is very uncertain whether ARP with allograft changes need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement compared with ARP with xenograft (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Extraction of third molars (wisdom teeth) vs No active treatment (control)

Size of the lower jaw (arch length, change) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Extraction of third molars (wisdom teeth) led to higher size of the lower jaw (arch length, change) compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with alloplast vs ARP with xenograft

Complications (e.g. discomfort, pain and swelling) · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…
1 finding from 1 review

ARP with alloplast plus barrier membrane vs ARP with alloplast without membrane

Implant failure rate · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (Hyrax) vs Fixed fan-type expander

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    post-treatment 3 weeks
    Gopalakrishnan 2017: Hyrax 8.00 (SD 2.19) mm vs fan-type 1.83 (SD 0.41) mm; P<0.001 (greater intermolar expansion with Hyrax)
    1 study · 12 participants
    GRADE not reported

Any orthodontic (non-surgical) treatment to correct posterior crossbite or expand the top teeth vs No treatment or another orthodontic treatment

Signs and symptoms of temporomandibular joint dysfunction · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Intermediate restorative material (IRM)

Success rate (radiographically‐assessed healing of cyst healing based on the Neer/Cole rating system) · Patients needing retrograde filling in root canal therapy (orthograde root canal filling or retreatment not possible; periapical surgery…

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) showed no clear difference in success rate at 2 years compared with intermediate restorative material (IRM); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Lower lingual arch vs No active treatment (control)

Lower incisors to mandible (position, mm) at 9 months · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Lower lingual arch led to higher lower incisors to mandible at 1 year compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Super ethoxybenzoic acid (Super-EBA)

Success rate at 1 year · Patients needing retrograde filling in root canal therapy (orthograde root canal filling or retreatment not possible; periapical surgery…

It is very uncertain whether mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) changes success rate at 1 year compared with super ethoxybenzoic acid (Super-EBA) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with alloplast vs ARP with xenograft

Changes in bucco-lingual/palatal width of alveolar ridge (mm) · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

It is very uncertain whether ARP with alloplast changes changes in bucco-lingual/palatal width of alveolar ridge (mm) compared with ARP with xenograft (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Extraction of lower deciduous canines vs No active treatment (control)

Size of the lower jaw (arch length, change) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Extraction of lower deciduous canines led to lower size of the lower jaw (arch length, change) at 1 year compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with demineralised bone matrix, single particle size vs ARP with demineralised bone matrix, multiple particle size

Changes in bucco-lingual/palatal width of alveolar ridge (mm) · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

It is very uncertain whether ARP with demineralised bone matrix, single particle size changes changes in bucco-lingual/palatal width of alveolar ridge (mm) compared with ARP with demineralised bone matrix, multiple particle size (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chemotherapy regimen A (+/- locoregional treatment) vs Chemotherapy regimen B (+/- locoregional treatment)

Locoregional control · People receiving curative-intent treatment for oral cavity and oropharyngeal (squamous cell) cancer
1 finding from 1 review

Rubber dam isolation and moisture control (alone or with saliva aspiration) vs Cotton rolls (with or without saliva aspiration)

Clinical evaluation of restoration's quality · Dental patients undergoing direct or indirect restorative treatment (no age or gender restriction)
1 finding from 1 review
  • Rubber dam isolation for restorative treatment in dental patients 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    6, 12, 18 months · Non-carious cervical lesions (composite restoration)
    Loguercio 2015: no significant differences (P>0.05) in marginal staining and marginal adaptation of NCCL restorations between rubber dam and cotton rolls/retraction cords at 6, 12 and 18 months.
    1 study · 30 participants
    GRADE not reported

Rubber dam isolation and moisture control (alone or with saliva aspiration) vs Cotton rolls (with or without saliva aspiration)

Participant acceptance/satisfaction · Dental patients undergoing direct or indirect restorative treatment (no age or gender restriction)
1 finding from 1 review
  • Rubber dam isolation for restorative treatment in dental patients 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Non-carious cervical lesions (composite restoration)
    Evidence did not support higher acceptance/preference for rubber dam than cotton rolls (P = 0.85 from binomial test on 28 participants; very low-certainty evidence) (Loguercio 2015).
    1 study · 28 participants
    Very low