Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

417 questions · 819 findings · 72 reviews

No studies found 9 · 1.1%GRADE not reported 759 · 92.7%Very low 39 · 4.8%Low 5 · 0.6%Moderate 6 · 0.7%High 1 · 0.1%

GG genotype of ENAM rs1264848 vs AA + AG genotype of ENAM rs1264848

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between GG genotype vs AA + AG genotype of ENAM rs1264848 and dental caries susceptibility (GG vs AA + AG model: OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.53-2.23) in the Ethnicity: Mixed subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

TT genotype of AMELX rs2106416 vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs2106416

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs2106416 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC + CT model: OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.44-6.34) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

AG + GG genotype (G-allele carriers) of ENAM rs1264848 vs AA genotype of ENAM rs1264848

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between AG + GG genotype (G-allele carriers) vs AA genotype of ENAM rs1264848 and dental caries susceptibility (AG + GG vs AA model: OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.78-3.68) in the Ethnicity: Mixed subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

TT genotype of AMELX rs946252 vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs946252

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs946252 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC + CT model: OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.19-2.87) in the Control group: Caries-free subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

T allele of AMELX rs6639060 vs C allele of AMELX rs6639060

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between T allele vs C allele of AMELX rs6639060 and dental caries susceptibility (T vs C model: OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.63-1.85) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

TT genotype of AMELX rs2106416 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs2106416

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC genotype of AMELX rs2106416 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC model: OR 1.83, 95% CI 0.47-7.06); certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

TT genotype of ENAM rs3796703 vs CC + CT genotype of ENAM rs3796703

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC + CT genotype of ENAM rs3796703 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC + CT model: OR 2.90, 95% CI 0.92-9.12); certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

T allele of AMELX rs2106416 vs C allele of AMELX rs2106416

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between T allele vs C allele of AMELX rs2106416 and dental caries susceptibility (T vs C model: OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.16-2.11); certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

CT genotype of ENAM rs3796703 vs CC genotype of ENAM rs3796703

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between CT genotype vs CC genotype of ENAM rs3796703 and dental caries susceptibility (CT vs CC model: OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.23-3.48) in the Ethnicity: Asian subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

TT genotype of ENAM rs3796703 vs CC genotype of ENAM rs3796703

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC genotype of ENAM rs3796703 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC model: OR 5.22, 95% CI 0.25-108.96) in the Ethnicity: Asian subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

CT + TT genotype (T-allele carriers) of ENAM rs3796703 vs CC genotype of ENAM rs3796703

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between CT + TT genotype (T-allele carriers) vs CC genotype of ENAM rs3796703 and dental caries susceptibility (CT + TT vs CC model: OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.23-3.63); certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

TT genotype of AMELX rs6639060 vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs6639060

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs6639060 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC + CT model: OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.42-2.39) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

Simple childhood caries prediction models with at least two predictors vs No competing model

Dental caries discrimination (area under the curve) · Children or adolescents

The Luo (2021) model had an AUC of 0.77 (95% CI 0.76 to 0.77).

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

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

DMFT/DMFS index (dental caries experience) · Children aged 0-12 years in the United Kingdom

In UK studies, OHPPs were associated with lower DMFT/S (OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.58; 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

DMFT/DMFS index (dental caries experience) · Children aged 0-12 years in Ireland

The single Irish study showed lower DMFT/S with OHPP (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.61; ungraded, single study).

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

DMFT/DMFS index (dental caries experience) · Children aged 0-12 years in Japan

The single Japanese study yielded a degenerate estimate of OR 0.00 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.00; ungraded, single study).

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

DMFT/DMFS index (dental caries experience) · Children aged 0-12 years (studies published 2015 or later)

In studies published from 2015 onward, OHPPs were associated with lower DMFT (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.53; 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

DMFT/DMFS index (dental caries experience) · Children aged 0-12 years in Finland

The single Finnish study showed lower DMFT/S with OHPP (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.56; ungraded, single study).

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

DMFT/DMFS index (dental caries experience) · Children aged 0-12 years (studies published before 2015)

In studies published before 2015, OHPPs were associated with lower DMFT (OR 0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.13; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Electronic cigarette use vs Non-smokers

Untreated dental caries and caries risk · Humans who use e-cigarettes (adolescents to adults) assessed for dental caries

Across individual cross-sectional studies, e-cigarette users tended to have more untreated caries and higher caries risk than non-smokers (per-study OR ~2.0-4.2), but results were not pooled (ungraded, narrative).

1 finding from 1 review