Search

What do systematic reviews say?

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

116 questions · 151 findings · 23 reviews · related questions CL0289

No studies found 3 · 2%GRADE not reported 93 · 61.6%Very low 9 · 6%Low 17 · 11.3%Moderate 29 · 19.2%High 0 · 0%

Food marketing exposure or greater marketing power vs No, less, or less powerful food marketing

Food choice · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)

In crossover studies with binary outcomes, food marketing had no clear association with food choice (OR 3.45, 95% CI 0.97 to 12.43; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Stepwise excavation (two-stage caries removal, re-entry after an interval) vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Pulp exposure during caries removal · Children (3-11 years) with symptomless, vital dentine caries in primary molars

Stepwise excavation reduced the reported risk of pulp exposure by 69% versus complete caries removal (RR 0.31; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Compomer (C) vs Resin composite restoration

Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with carious primary molars treated by pulpotomy (vital pulp therapy)

Compomer restorations had an annual failure rate of 8.9% in primary molars after pulpotomy, higher than composite resin in the same trial (single high-risk-of-bias RCT; low quality of evidence; not GRADE-rated).

2 findings from 1 review

Non-responsive complementary feeding (NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding

Overweight/obesity risk · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

Non-responsive complementary feeding showed no significant association with overweight/obesity across observational studies (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non-responsive complementary feeding (NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding

Weight gain · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

Narratively, restrictive NRCF style tended to favor excess weight and coercive/pressuring style tended to favor lower weight (3 of 5 studies each; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Baby-led weaning (BLW) vs Traditional complementary feeding (TCF)

Overweight/obesity risk · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

Among observational studies, baby-led weaning was associated with lower odds of overweight/obesity than other feeding models (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.55), but certainty is very low.

1 finding from 1 review

Baby-led weaning (BLW) vs Traditional complementary feeding (TCF)

Infant weight-length gain (achievement of adequate weight) · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

Baby-led weaning/BLISS did not significantly influence infant weight-length (adequate weight) gain versus other complementary feeding models (pooled OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 10.51; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Pulp exposure during caries removal · Children with dentine caries in primary and permanent teeth

Partial caries removal was reported to reduce pulp-exposure risk by 77% versus complete caries removal (RR 0.23; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Pulp exposure during caries removal · Children (3-11 years) with symptomless, vital dentine caries in primary molars

Partial caries removal reduced the reported risk of pulp exposure versus complete caries removal in primary teeth (RR 0.24; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Food marketing exposure or greater marketing power vs No, less, or less powerful food marketing

Food purchasing · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)

Across five studies, 40% showed any association of potential public health harm for food purchasing (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Responsive complementary feeding (RCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding (traditional/non-responsive CF)

Physical growth / weight gain · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

Two RCTs suggest responsive complementary feeding leads to better weight gain in the first two years, though effects were small and not always sustained (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Baby-led weaning (BLW) vs Other models of complementary feeding

Overweight/obesity risk · Healthy children aged 6–24 months in Western industrialized countries

BLW was associated with lower overweight/obesity risk in observational studies, but the certainty was very low.

1 finding from 1 review

Baby-led weaning (BLW) / BLISS vs Traditional complementary feeding (TCF)

Choking · Healthy children aged 6–24 months in Western industrialized countries

No statistically significant difference in choking events between BLW/BLISS and TCF was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Baby-Led Introduction to SolidS (BLISS) vs Traditional complementary feeding (TCF)

Overweight/obesity risk · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

In RCTs, BLISS did not significantly change overweight/obesity risk versus traditional feeding (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.00 to 17.79; low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non-responsive complementary feeding (NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding

Overweight/obesity risk · Healthy children aged 6–24 months in Western industrialized countries

NRCF showed no significant association with overweight/obesity across the reported comparisons (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Responsive / non-responsive complementary feeding (RCF/NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding

Choking · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

No systematic reviews or studies assessed choking risk for RCF or NRCF (only BLW/BLISS); this is an evidence gap.

1 finding from 1 review

Baby-led weaning (BLW) / BLISS vs Traditional complementary feeding (TCF)

Choking · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

No significant difference in choking risk was found between BLW/BLISS-fed and traditionally fed infants (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Baby-Led Introduction to SolidS (BLISS) vs Other models of complementary feeding

Overweight/obesity risk · Healthy children aged 6–24 months in Western industrialized countries

BLISS did not show a statistically significant reduction in overweight/obesity risk at 24 months (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review