evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

11 questions · 23 findings · 4 reviews · All outcomes

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 23 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Longer follow-up vs Shorter follow-up

Annual increment in DMFS (D3) · Children and adolescents with permanent dentition

Not adjusted meta-regression beta was 0.43 per additional follow-up year.

5 findings from 1 review
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Not adjusted
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.43 [0.04, 0.83]
    22 studies · 11300 participants
    GRADE not reported
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for bitewings and age at baseline
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.64 [0.31, 0.96]
    22 studies · 11300 participants
    GRADE not reported
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for bitewings age at baseline and baseline caries experience
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.37 [0.04, 0.70]
    22 studies · 11300 participants
    GRADE not reported
Show 2 more findings
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for groups 1-4 including relevance of evidence and risk of bias
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.46 [0.08, 0.83]
    22 studies · 11300 participants
    GRADE not reported
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for groups 1-3 including decade and preventive intervention
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.36 [-0.02, 0.73]
    22 studies · 11300 participants
    GRADE not reported

Longer follow-up vs Shorter follow-up

Annual increment in DMFT (D3) · Children and adolescents with permanent dentition

Not adjusted meta-regression beta was 0.18 per additional follow-up year.

5 findings from 1 review
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Not adjusted
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.18 [-0.04, 0.40]
    13 studies · 24753 participants
    GRADE not reported
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for bitewings and age at baseline
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.18 [0.02, 0.35]
    13 studies · 24753 participants
    GRADE not reported
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for bitewings age at baseline and baseline caries experience
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.23 [0.06, 0.40]
    13 studies · 24753 participants
    GRADE not reported
Show 2 more findings
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for groups 1-4 including relevance of evidence and risk of bias
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up -0.04 [-0.34, 0.26]
    13 studies · 24753 participants
    GRADE not reported
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for groups 1-3 including decade and preventive intervention
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.07 [-0.24, 0.39]
    13 studies · 24753 participants
    GRADE not reported

Longer follow-up vs Shorter follow-up

Caries incidence rate per person-year at risk (D3) · Children and adolescents with permanent dentition

Adjusted for groups 1-4 including relevance of evidence and risk of bias meta-regression beta was -0.02 per additional follow-up year.

5 findings from 1 review
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for groups 1-4 including relevance of evidence and risk of bias
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up -0.02 [-0.05, 0.01]
    15 studies · 10768 participants
    GRADE not reported
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for bitewings age at baseline and baseline caries experience
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.00 [-0.00, 0.01]
    15 studies · 10768 participants
    GRADE not reported
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for bitewings and age at baseline
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up 0.00 [-0.00, 0.01]
    15 studies · 10768 participants
    GRADE not reported
Show 2 more findings
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Adjusted for groups 1-3 including decade and preventive intervention
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up -0.00 [-0.02, 0.02]
    15 studies · 10768 participants
    GRADE not reported
  • Caries Progression Rates Revisited: A Systematic Review. 2019 All outcomes
    Per additional year of follow-up · Western or comparable populations · Not adjusted
    Meta-regression beta per year of follow-up -0.00 [-0.01, 0.01]
    15 studies · 10768 participants
    GRADE not reported

Daily chewing gum for 2 weeks or longer vs No gum chewing or control

Salivary flow rate (unstimulated) · Elderly (>60 years) and medically compromised adults with xerostomia / dry mouth

codex

1 finding from 1 review

Partial pulpotomy with one-unit longer follow-up vs Partial pulpotomy with one-unit shorter follow-up

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Adults aged 18 years or older with mature permanent teeth and carious pulp exposure

In the high-risk-study-excluded sensitivity meta-regression, longer follow-up was associated with lower success.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

Severe pain for > 1 week · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… led to higher severe pain for > 1 week compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

Experienced the operation negatively · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… showed no clear difference in experienced the operation negatively compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

No improvement of facial appearance (3 weeks) · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… led to lower no improvement of facial appearance (3 weeks) compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

Prosthetic failure (2 years) · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… showed no clear difference in prosthetic failure compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

Major complications · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… led to higher major complications compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

Implant failure · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review