evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

260 questions · 304 findings · 27 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 58 · 19.1%GRADE not reported 90 · 29.6%Very low 86 · 28.3%Low 45 · 14.8%Moderate 16 · 5.3%High 9 · 3%

Primary health professional‐ and community professional‐led interventions vs enhanced usual care

Prevalence of morphine use · adult patients with substance dependence

It is very uncertain whether primary health professional‐ and community professional‐led… changes prevalence of morphine use compared with enhanced usual care (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Primary health professional‐ and community professional‐led interventions vs enhanced usual care

Clinical symptoms ‐ alcohol use (1 to 6 months post intervention) · adult patients with substance dependence

It is very uncertain whether primary health professional‐ and community professional‐led… changes clinical symptoms ‐ alcohol use (< 1 month post intervention) compared with enhanced usual care (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Primary health professional‐ and community professional‐led interventions vs enhanced usual care

Clinical symptoms ‐ drug use (< 1 month post intervention) ‐ heroin · adult patients with substance dependence

It is very uncertain whether primary health professional‐ and community professional‐led… changes clinical symptoms ‐ drug use (< 1 month post intervention) ‐ heroin compared with enhanced usual care (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic accuracy on surfaces with pit and fissure sealants · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies) · Pit and fissure sealants
    Pre-specified heterogeneity investigation of surfaces with pit and fissure sealants: no study reported the inclusion of sealants that would allow evaluation of early caries lesions.
    0 studies
    No studies found

Near-infrared (NIR) transillumination vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Digital radiographs vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Electrical conductance devices (electronic caries monitor (ECM) and/or CarieScan Pro), used as an adjunct to clinical oral examination vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual examination (with or without radiographs)

Outcome not reported · Children/adolescents/adults or extracted teeth; target condition = non-cavitated enamel caries on PROXIMAL (approximal) tooth surfaces.

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Electrical conductance for the detection of dental caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    No eligible studies. All included studies assessed occlusal surfaces only ('All studies assessed the use of the electrical conductance devices on occlusal surfaces.'); proximal surfaces were a planned surface subgroup…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic accuracy in previously restored teeth (secondary caries) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies) · Restorations (secondary caries)
    Pre-specified heterogeneity investigation of teeth with previously applied restorations (secondary caries): no study intentionally included restored teeth in its sample. Studies evaluating secondary caries were…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Electrical conductance devices (electronic caries monitor (ECM) and/or CarieScan Pro), used as an adjunct to clinical oral examination vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual examination (with or without radiographs)

Outcome not reported · Samples with a low (<15%) prevalence of caries into dentine (d3/D3); target condition = non-cavitated enamel caries.

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Electrical conductance for the detection of dental caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    No eligible studies. 'No studies reported the inclusion of a low prevalence (0% to 14%) of d3/D3 of tooth surfaces'; all included studies reported d3/D3 prevalence of 15% or above, so the planned low-prevalence…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Transillumination and optical coherence tomography devices (all illumination devices combined: NIR, OCT, and FOTI/DIFOTI) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Electrical conductance (e.g. electronic caries monitor, ECM) vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual-tactile examination

Outcome not reported · Adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of having root caries (in vivo); extracted teeth of adults (in vitro)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Tests to detect and inform the diagnosis of root caries 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Electrical conductance was a pre-specified eligible index test but no diagnostic test accuracy study of electrical conductance was included. A study evaluating the electronic caries monitor (ECM) (Wicht 2002) was…
    0 studies
    No studies found

VistaProof (Durr Dental; blue fluorescence, 405 nm) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) for detection of early enamel caries (D1 threshold) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Fluorescence devices for the detection of dental caries 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    Analysed as a separate index test (coupled forest plot and SROC plot, Figure 24 / Figure 25; Appendix 5); no summary DOR or sensitivity/specificity point reported numerically in the text. 18 datasets, 2402 tooth sites.
    17 studies
    GRADE not reported

Laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent 2190/pen) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) for detection of early enamel caries (D1 threshold) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Fluorescence devices for the detection of dental caries 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    Analysed as a separate index test (coupled forest plot and SROC plot, Figure 22 / Figure 23; Appendix 5); no summary DOR or sensitivity/specificity point reported numerically in the text. 34 datasets, 6842 tooth sites.
    32 studies
    GRADE not reported