Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

51 questions · 58 findings · 7 reviews

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 55 · 94.8%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 1.7%Moderate 2 · 3.4%High 0 · 0%

38% SDF plus oral health education vs oral health instruction plus water

new root-surface carious lesions or restorations · community-dwelling older adults with root caries

SDF plus oral health education had a 33% preventative fraction at 24 months; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF plus oral health education vs oral health instruction plus tonic water

new root-surface carious lesions or restorations · community-dwelling older adults with root caries

SDF had a 62% preventative fraction; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF (applied every 6 or 12 months) vs 12% SDF solution (applied annually)

Caries arrest · Children (age 1-10 years) with active cavitated dentin caries lesions in primary molars

38% SDF arrested more caries than 12% SDF (pooled ES 0.37, 95% CI 0.27-0.47; single study; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

OHI + 38% SDF (applied every 12 months) vs oral health instruction plus water

new root-surface carious lesions or restorations · community-dwelling older adults with root caries

SDF had a 28% preventative fraction at 24 months; 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)

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 varnish plus oral health instruction vs oral health instruction plus water

new root-surface carious lesions or restorations · Older adults with root caries in permanent (mature) teeth (mean age 75 years)

SDF had a 71% preventative fraction at 36 months; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Secondary caries prevention in young permanent first molars · Children with deep occlusal caries in young permanent first molars (indirect pulp capping)

SDF and RMGIC did not differ significantly for secondary caries prevention in young permanent molars (no events; p>0.05; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF one-time application without brushing programme vs no treatment without brushing programme

new carious lesions or fillings · Children with dental caries in permanent (first) molars

The review reported no significant result for SDF; no effect estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF plus potassium iodide and oral health instruction vs oral health instruction plus tonic water

new root-surface carious lesions or restorations · community-dwelling older adults with root caries

SDF plus potassium iodide had a 52% preventative fraction; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Secondary caries prevention in young permanent first molars · Children with deep occlusal caries in young permanent first molars (indirect pulp capping)

SDF+KI and RMGIC did not differ significantly for secondary caries prevention (p>0.05; 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