evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

123 questions · 140 findings · 27 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 7 · 5%GRADE not reported 40 · 28.6%Very low 23 · 16.4%Low 38 · 27.1%Moderate 21 · 15%High 11 · 7.9%

Populations with a low level of schooling (>=33.60% of the population with low schooling) vs Populations with a higher level of schooling (<33.60% of the population with low schooling)

Caries experience (mean DMFT) · Adults aged 19-60 years

Population level of schooling was not significantly associated with caries experience (DMFT) in subgroup meta-analysis or meta-regression; ungraded observational evidence with very high heterogeneity.

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

Populations with a lower proportion of university-educated people (<33.78% with university level) vs Populations with a higher proportion of university-educated people (>=33.78% with university level)

Caries experience (mean DMFT) · Adults aged 19-60 years

The proportion of university-educated people was not associated with caries experience (DMFT); pooled DMFT was similar across subgroups and the meta-regression was non-significant; ungraded observational evidence.

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

Sociodemographic and behavioural factors (older age, lower education, lower income, poor oral hygiene/brushing, smoking, disadvantaged/slum residence, sex) vs Referent groups (younger, higher education/income, better oral hygiene, non-slum residence)

Determinants of oral diseases · Adult residents of slums and non-slum urban settings of LMICs

Age, education, income, oral-hygiene behaviour, dental-visit pattern and slum/disadvantaged residence are associated with oral disease; gender effects are disease-specific; ungraded.

1 finding from 1 review