Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,929 questions · 15,213 findings · 2,394 reviews

No studies found 15,213 · 100%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Ranked among the 5,000 newest matching findings; add words or filters to narrow the search.

Double primary (canine and first molar) tooth extraction vs Single primary (canine) tooth extraction

Any other adverse effects of the interventions, such as gingival disease and demineralisation · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Intensive periodontal treatment (subgingival SRP with or without other periodontal treatment) vs Supra-gingival scaling

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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Heart rate was reported only by Higashi 2009 (periodontal treatment vs no treatment); no study in the intensive-treatment vs supra-gingival-scaling comparison reported heart rate.
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

ARP with xenograft (bone graft) vs Extraction alone

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

Any of the interventions (CR, SE, SW, sealing with sealant materials, Hall Technique, or NRCC) vs Each other, placebo, or no treatment

Adverse events (any type) and safety of sealant · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

COE with light-based detection (e.g. ViziLite Plus, Microlux/DL, VELscope, Identafi 3000) vs COE with vital rinsing (toluidine blue/tolonium chloride)

Outcome not reported · Apparently healthy adults not reporting symptoms of OPMD or OSCC, attending an organised screening or surveillance programme, or screened…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Extraction of the primary (baby) canine (single primary tooth extraction) vs No extraction (non-intervention control)

Time taken for the canine to erupt into the mouth · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Any of the interventions (CR, SE, SW, sealing with sealant materials, Hall Technique, or NRCC) vs Each other, placebo, or no treatment

Subjective evaluation of the treatments by participants · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Blood and saliva analysis (biomarker tests) vs Surgical or punch biopsy with histological assessment

Outcome not reported · Adults (aged 16 years or over) presenting to primary or secondary care with clinically evident suspicious or innocuous oral lesions

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

COE with blood/salivary (biomarker) analysis vs COE with vital rinsing (toluidine blue/tolonium chloride)

Outcome not reported · Apparently healthy adults not reporting symptoms of OPMD or OSCC, attending an organised screening or surveillance programme, or screened…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with allograft plus synthetic cell-binding peptide P-15 vs ARP with allograft without P-15

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

Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) vs Histological validation (in vitro) or cavity preparation/biopsy (in vivo)

Occlusal caries detection accuracy · Human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars) in patients, occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces

No eligible QLF studies met the meta-analysis inclusion criteria (candidate QLF studies were identified but none had acceptable index/reference tests and reporting quality).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Proportion of participants diagnosed with hypertension at trial completion · Adults (any age/sex) with chronic periodontitis (>=5 teeth remaining; PPD >4 mm), with or without hypertension

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Double primary (canine and first molar) tooth extraction vs Single primary (canine) tooth extraction

Costs and cost‐effectiveness · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

COE with blood/salivary (biomarker) analysis vs Conventional oral examination (COE) alone

Outcome not reported · Apparently healthy adults not reporting symptoms of OPMD or OSCC, attending an organised screening or surveillance programme, or screened…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review