What do systematic reviews say?

Any method, procedure or policy to reduce contaminated aerosols in dental clinics vs Any other method, no treatment or combination of methods

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions to reduce contaminated aerosols produced during dental procedures for preventing infectious diseases 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Resin composite restorations containing antibacterial agents vs Non-antibacterial containing composite restorations

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Antibacterial agents in composite restorations for the prevention of dental caries 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No studies were included in this review, as we were unable to find any trials directly comparing antibacterial containing composites to other active interventions or controls.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Single full-coverage metal-ceramic crown over composite core and post vs Direct adhesive composite restoration with post (conventional filling, no crown)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root‐filled teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No data were reported nor measured by the study. The abstract confirms no evidence was available for any secondary outcome.
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Any denture cleansing method (mechanical or chemical) vs Another therapy, placebo, or no treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for cleaning dentures in adults 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Noticeable absence of reports about costs of materials associated with denture cleansing methods; no included study assessed costs (Discussion; Implications for research).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Extraction of the primary (baby) canine (single primary tooth extraction) vs No extraction (non-intervention control)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for promoting the eruption of palatally displaced permanent canine teeth, without the need for surgical… 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The study did not report cost-effectiveness.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Antioxidants (lycopene, curcumin, Oxitard) vs Placebo or no active treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for managing oral submucous fibrosis 2024 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The trials did not measure costs.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants vs Short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for replacing missing teeth: augmentation procedures of the maxillary sinus 2014 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Treatment costs: no trials reported this outcome (extrapolated by the review authors). Additional costs were associated with the long-implant + augmentation group (extra surgery, biomaterial, barrier, hospitalisation…
  0 studies
  No studies found

Fee‐for‐service (FFS) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

• The effect of different methods of remuneration on the behaviour of primary care dentists 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes

  18 months
  ICER 0.10
  1 study · 68 participants
  Very low

Double primary (canine and first molar) tooth extraction vs Single primary (canine) tooth extraction

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for promoting the eruption of palatally displaced permanent canine teeth, without the need for surgical… 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The studies did not report cost-effectiveness.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Stepwise carious tissue removal (SW)

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Permanent and primary dentition
  Cost-effectiveness reported narratively: SE found more cost-effective than SW in permanent (Labib 2019) and primary teeth (Elhennawy 2021); not GRADE-rated.
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Primary dentition
  Cost-effectiveness reported narratively: HT found more cost-effective than CR in primary teeth (Innes 2011; Santamaria 2018); not GRADE-rated.
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported

Hall technique vs Non-restorative cavity control (NRCC)

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Primary dentition
  Cost-effectiveness reported narratively: HT found more cost-effective than NRCC in primary teeth (Santamaria 2018); not GRADE-rated.
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Ball (stud) attachment system vs Bar attachment system

• Interventions for replacing missing teeth: attachment systems for implant overdentures in edentulous jaws 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Walton 2002 reported costs but the data could not be used due to failure to report means and standard deviations and only providing the median of the costs.
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Ball (stud) attachment system vs Telescopic attachment system

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for replacing missing teeth: attachment systems for implant overdentures in edentulous jaws 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Amifostine vs no treatment/placebo

• Pharmacological interventions for preventing dry mouth and salivary gland dysfunction following radiotherapy 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes

  End of RT
  Mean per-patient supportive care costs lower with amifostine (USD 4401) than control (USD 5873); P = 0.02 (Buntzel 1998 / Bennett 2001)
  1 study · 28 participants
  GRADE not reported

EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 to 70 months
  No included studies addressed direct and indirect costs to participants and health services (review-wide gap).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Micro-invasive treatment (proximal sealing or resin infiltration): resin sealant, glass ionomer sealant, polyurethane/adhesive patch, or resin infiltration vs Non-invasive / control treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Micro‐invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  None of the studies reported on costs for micro-invasive treatment or non-invasive control
  0 studies
  No studies found