evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

27 questions · 28 findings · 2 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 25 · 89.3%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 3.6%Moderate 2 · 7.1%High 0 · 0%

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Other methods (pooled: ART/glass ionomer cement, nano-silver fluoride, sodium fluoride varnish, placebo)

Adverse effects (tooth staining and other side effects) · Children and adults with active dental caries (aged 1-50; mostly preschool/school children with primary dentition)

SDF commonly causes black staining of arrested lesions; only mild, transient adverse events were reported, with no major adverse events (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF plus potassium iodide (KI) (indirect pulp capping) vs Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC)

Secondary prevention of caries · children with deep occlusal carious lesions in permanent molars

No significant difference in secondary caries prevention was reported; no effect estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF every 12 months vs water every 12 months

new carious lesions or fillings at fissure-site level · children with caries in permanent molars

SDF had a 52% preventative fraction at fissure-site level; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF (indirect pulp capping) vs Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC)

Restoration color, marginal staining and luster (esthetics) · Children with deep occlusal caries in young permanent first molars (indirect pulp capping)

RMGIC gave significantly better restoration esthetics than SDF, which caused black staining (p=0.03; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review