evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

6 questions · 18 findings · 4 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 18 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Low income vs High income

Prevalence of untreated decay (% DT > 0) · Adults aged 25 years and older in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States

In Australia, low versus high income differed by 11.90 percentage points in prevalence of untreated decay.

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

Low income vs High income

Mean number of decayed teeth (mean DT) · Adults aged 25 years and older in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States

Across four countries, low versus high income differed by 0.44 decayed teeth in mean number of decayed teeth (random-effects meta-analysis; I2=76.4%).

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

Low income vs High income

Prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health · Adults aged 25 years and older in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States

Across four countries, low versus high income differed by 15.77 percentage points in prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health (random-effects meta-analysis; I2=13.4%).

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

Sociodemographic / socioeconomic factors (single-parent family, low parental education, family income, socioeconomic status) vs Absence of the factor / reference socioeconomic category

Caries increment in permanent teeth · School children and adolescents (6-18 years) followed from primary dentition (baseline examination before 72 months of age)

Evidence on the association between sociodemographic/socioeconomic factors and permanent-teeth caries is weak and inconsistent (3 studies; could not be pooled; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review