Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

14 questions · 18 findings · 2 reviews · Dental caries

No studies found 9 · 50%GRADE not reported 5 · 27.8%Very low 4 · 22.2%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Sealants or resin infiltration

Secondary prevention of caries · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) showed no clear difference in secondary prevention of caries compared with sealants or resin infiltration; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) with glass ionomer cement (GIC) or glass ionomer material

Secondary prevention of caries · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs placebo or no treatment

Secondary prevention of caries · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

3 findings from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Fluoride varnish

Secondary prevention of caries · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

3 findings from 1 review

38% SDF (indirect pulp capping) vs Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC)

Secondary prevention of caries · children with deep occlusal carious lesions in permanent molars

No significant difference in secondary caries prevention was reported; no effect estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF plus potassium iodide (KI) (indirect pulp capping) vs Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC)

Secondary prevention of caries · children with deep occlusal carious lesions in permanent molars

No significant difference in secondary caries prevention was reported; no effect estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

SDF (given at a particular frequency, concentration, or duration) vs SDF (given at a different frequency, concentration, or duration)

Secondary prevention of caries · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

It is very uncertain whether SDF (given at a particular frequency, concentration, or duration) changes secondary prevention of caries compared with SDF (given at a different frequency, concentration, or duration) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF (indirect pulp capping under resin composite) vs Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC)

Secondary caries prevention in young permanent first molars · Children with deep occlusal caries in young permanent first molars (indirect pulp capping)

SDF and RMGIC did not differ significantly for secondary caries prevention in young permanent molars (no events; p>0.05; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF plus potassium iodide (KI) (indirect pulp capping) vs Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC)

Secondary caries prevention in young permanent first molars · Children with deep occlusal caries in young permanent first molars (indirect pulp capping)

SDF+KI and RMGIC did not differ significantly for secondary caries prevention (p>0.05; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review