evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4 questions · 6 findings · 2 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 6 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

CPP-ACP vs CPP-ACFP

Remineralization / reduction in lesion severity (change in QLF, laser fluorescence, or lesion area) · Patients with white spot lesions / early caries lesions (WSLs/ECLs), including orthodontic and non-orthodontic lesions, active caries…

CPP-ACP did not differ significantly from CPP-ACFP (SMD 0.25, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.73); certainty of evidence not assessed (no GRADE).

1 finding from 1 review

CPP-ACP vs Placebo or no active treatment

Remineralization / reduction in lesion severity (change in QLF, laser fluorescence, or lesion area) · Patients with white spot lesions / early caries lesions (WSLs/ECLs), including orthodontic and non-orthodontic lesions, active caries…

CPP-ACP did not differ significantly from control (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.14); certainty of evidence not assessed (no GRADE).

1 finding from 1 review

CPP-ACP vs No active treatment (control)

Average enamel surface roughness · Extracted human teeth with early/artificial enamel lesions (in vitro)

In vitro, CPP-ACP markedly reduced enamel surface roughness versus control (SMD -8.21, 95% CI -10.37 to -6.04; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

CPP-ACP vs No active treatment (control)

Enamel surface microhardness · Extracted human teeth with early/artificial enamel lesions (in vitro)

In vitro, CPP-ACP increased Vickers microhardness versus control (SMD 1.19, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.66; ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review