evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

3 questions · 3 findings · 1 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 3 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Closest answers

The findings closest to your search, judged one by one by TypeSafe's Jev model.

  • Direct match · question page
    • Oral-health promotion programs (OHPPs): community-based oral-health education/training, supervised toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste and topical fluoride, dental screening, and dietary advice vs No oral-health promotion program, or a differing (usual-care) action under similar conditions · Incremental cost-effectiveness per DMFT/S
      Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Oral-Health Promotion in Dental Caries Prevention among Children:… 2019 All outcomes
      Community settings: home visits, telephone contacts, healthcare centers, and primary schools · Age < 6 years
      OR 0.07 [0.02, 0.32]
      6 studies
      GRADE not reported
  • Direct match · question page
    • Oral-health promotion programs (OHPPs): community-based oral-health education/training, supervised toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste and topical fluoride, dental screening, and dietary advice vs No oral-health promotion program, or a differing (usual-care) action under similar conditions · Cost-effectiveness: probability of lower program cost per DMFT/S (incremental cost)
      Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Oral-Health Promotion in Dental Caries Prevention among Children:… 2019 All outcomes
      Community settings: home visits, telephone contacts, healthcare centers, and primary schools · Age >= 6 years
      OR 0.00 [0.00, 48704.6]
      2 studies
      GRADE not reported
  • Direct match · question page
    • Oral-health promotion programs (OHPPs): community-based oral-health education/training, supervised toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste and topical fluoride, dental screening, and dietary advice vs No oral-health promotion program, or a differing (usual-care) action under similar conditions · Incremental cost-effectiveness per DMFT/S
      Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Oral-Health Promotion in Dental Caries Prevention among Children:… 2019 All outcomes
      Community settings: home visits, telephone contacts, healthcare centers, and primary schools
      OR 0.03 [0.01, 0.11]
      8 studies
      GRADE not reported

Oral-health promotion programs (OHPPs): community-based oral-health education/training, supervised toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste and topical fluoride, dental screening, and dietary advice vs No oral-health promotion program, or a differing (usual-care) action under similar conditions

Incremental cost‐effectiveness · Children younger than 6 years (healthy except for dental caries)

In children younger than 6 years, OHPPs were associated with lower cost per DMFT/S (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.32; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral-health promotion programs (OHPPs): community-based oral-health education/training, supervised toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste and topical fluoride, dental screening, and dietary advice vs No oral-health promotion program, or a differing (usual-care) action under similar conditions

Incremental cost‐effectiveness · Children with dental caries

OHPPs were associated with a lower program cost per DMFT/S in about 97 of 100 programs (OR 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.11; ungraded, very high heterogeneity I2=99%).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral-health promotion programs (OHPPs): community-based oral-health education/training, supervised toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste and topical fluoride, dental screening, and dietary advice vs No oral-health promotion program, or a differing (usual-care) action under similar conditions

Cost‐effectiveness · Children aged 6 years and older (healthy except for dental caries)

In children aged 6 years and older, the cost-effectiveness estimate was extremely imprecise and not significant (OR 0.00, 95% CI 0.00 to 48704.6; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review