Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

3,032 questions · 3,358 findings · 190 reviews · related questions CL0289

No studies found 599 · 17.8%GRADE not reported 1,759 · 52.4%Very low 612 · 18.2%Low 269 · 8%Moderate 107 · 3.2%High 12 · 0.4%

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

Aesthetic outcomes of future prosthodontic rehabilitation · 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

Self-ligating brackets vs Conventional brackets

Lower incisor inclination (lingual tipping and retrusion) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Self-ligating brackets showed no clear difference in lower incisors to mandible (inclination, degrees) compared with conventional brackets; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Concomitant (concurrent) chemoradiotherapy vs Radiotherapy alone

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

Concomitant (concurrent) chemoradiotherapy led to lower locoregional control, concurrent chemoradiotherapy (platinum +… compared with radiotherapy alone (non-resectable tumours); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Coaxial nickel-titanium archwire vs Nickel-titanium archwire

Amount of tooth movement / reduction in crowding at 12 weeks · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

It is very uncertain whether coaxial nickel-titanium archwire changes amount of tooth movement / reduction in crowding at 12 weeks compared with nickel-titanium archwire (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy vs no treatment

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

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy showed no clear difference in canine expansion compared with no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    12 months after start of treatment
    U-bow activator 3.6 mm vs untreated 1 mm; P<0.001 (no SD reported); significant in favour of treatment
    1 study · 66 participants
    GRADE not reported

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) vs Removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate)

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

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) may leads to higher canine expansion (inter-canine distance) compared with removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Quad-helix plus multi-bracket appliance vs Expansion arch plus multi-bracket appliance

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

Quad-helix plus multi-bracket appliance showed no clear difference in molar expansion compared with expansion arch plus multi-bracket appliance; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) vs Removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate)

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

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) probably leads to lower length of treatment compared with removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

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 intermediate restorative material (IRM) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Clear aligners (Invisalign / thermoformed aligners) vs Fixed appliances

Probing pocket depth (PPD/PD) · Adults undergoing orthodontic treatment

Aligners may reduce pocket depth compared with fixed appliances in adults at 6-12 weeks (MD -0.42 mm, 95% CI -0.71 to -0.12; very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) vs Removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate)

Stability of crossbite correction (relapse of 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
    12 months after correction
    Relapse occurred in 9.1% of both quad-helix and expansion plate groups after one year of follow-up (Godoy 2011)
    1 study · 66 participants
    GRADE not reported

Surgery +/- radiotherapy + (adjuvant) chemotherapy vs Surgery +/- radiotherapy alone (observation or adjuvant radiotherapy only)

Overall survival, post-surgery chemotherapy vs surgery alone (no radiotherapy) · People receiving curative-intent treatment for oral cavity and oropharyngeal (squamous cell) cancer

Surgery +/- radiotherapy + (adjuvant) chemotherapy showed no clear difference in overall survival, adjuvant chemotherapy vs observation alone… compared with surgery +/- radiotherapy alone (observation or adjuvant radiotherapy… (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Vibrational appliance with fixed appliances vs Fixed appliances

Time to alignment · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Vibrational appliance with fixed appliances showed no clear difference in time to alignment (days) compared with fixed appliances only / no vibrational appliance (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

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

Haas expander anchored on deciduous second molars vs Haas expander anchored on permanent first molars

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

Hyrax with conventional expansion screw vs Hyrax with NiTi memory expansion screw

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
    after 6-month retention period
    Halicioglu 2014: conventional Hyrax 8.41 (SD 2.09) mm vs NiTi Hyrax 8.94 (SD 1.73) mm; no statistically significant differences for any outcome
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Self-ligating brackets vs Conventional brackets

Amount of crowding (lower incisor crowding) at 10 weeks · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

It is very uncertain whether self-ligating brackets changes amount of crowding (lower incisor crowding) at 10 weeks compared with conventional brackets (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with alloplast vs ARP with xenograft

Aesthetic outcomes of future prosthodontic rehabilitation · 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

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

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