Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,534 questions · 5,247 findings · 456 reviews

No studies found 1,142 · 21.8%GRADE not reported 1,503 · 28.6%Very low 1,040 · 19.8%Low 869 · 16.6%Moderate 554 · 10.6%High 139 · 2.6%

Ranked among the 5,000 newest matching findings; add words or filters to narrow the search.

Artificial bone graft: InFuse (collagen matrix) impregnated with rhBMP-2 vs Traditional iliac crest cancellous bone graft

Postoperative complication: persistent oronasal fistula · Skeletally mature patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate and an alveolar cleft defect (>5 years; mean age 16.1 years)

Artificial bone graft: InFuse (collagen matrix) impregnated with… showed no clear difference in postoperative complication: persistent oronasal fistula compared with traditional iliac crest cancellous bone graft; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Artificial bone graft: InFuse (collagen matrix) impregnated with rhBMP-2 vs Traditional iliac crest cancellous bone graft

Radiographic assessment: three-dimensional CT scan (0 to 3 grading scale) · Skeletally mature patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate and an alveolar cleft defect (>5 years; mean age 16.1 years)

Artificial bone graft: InFuse (collagen matrix) impregnated with… led to higher radiographic assessment: three-dimensional CT scan (0 to 3 grading… compared with traditional iliac crest cancellous bone graft; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Artificial bone graft: InFuse (collagen matrix) impregnated with rhBMP-2 vs Traditional iliac crest cancellous bone graft

Number of participants discharged on the same day as surgery · Skeletally mature patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate and an alveolar cleft defect (>5 years; mean age 16.1 years)

Artificial bone graft: InFuse (collagen matrix) impregnated with… led to higher number of participants discharged on the same day as surgery compared with traditional iliac crest cancellous bone graft; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Sealant/coating agent WITH fluoride release applied to teeth with fixed appliances vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Initiation of white spot lesions (WSL), visual-tactile assessment · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances

Among fluoride-releasing sealants, the reduction in WSL initiation versus no sealant was not statistically significant (RR 0.69); subgroup not separately GRADE-rated.

1 finding from 1 review

Sealant/coating agent WITHOUT fluoride release applied to teeth with fixed appliances vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Initiation of white spot lesions (WSL), visual-tactile assessment · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances

Among non-fluoride sealants, WSL initiation was significantly reduced versus no sealant (RR 0.69); subgroup not separately GRADE-rated.

1 finding from 1 review

Sealant or coating agent (with or without fluoride release) applied to teeth with fixed appliances vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

White spot lesions assessed by laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent) · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances

White spot lesions were also measured by laser fluorescence in 3 sealant-vs-no-sealant studies, but no meta-analysis was possible due to incompatible reporting.

1 finding from 1 review

Sealant or coating agent (with or without fluoride release) applied to teeth with fixed appliances vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Initiation of white spot lesions (WSL), visual-tactile assessment · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances

The additional use of a sealant probably reduces the initiation of white spot lesions during fixed orthodontic treatment compared with no sealant (RR 0.70), but the certainty of evidence is very low.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Caries increment on permanent whole teeth (D(M)FT), prevented fraction · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or younger (permanent dentition)
3 findings from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Caries increment on permanent tooth surfaces (D(M)FS), prevented fraction · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or younger (permanent dentition)
3 findings from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Unacceptability of treatment (dropouts/exclusions during the trial) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any… showed no clear difference in unacceptability of treatment (dropouts/exclusions during the trial) compared with placebo or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

3 findings from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Mucosal irritation / oral soft tissue allergic reaction (signs of sensitivity) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Proportion of children not remaining caries-free · Children with primary (deciduous) teeth (younger children)

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any… showed no clear difference in proportion of children not remaining caries-free compared with placebo or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Staining · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Signs of acute toxicity during gel application (nausea, gagging, vomiting) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

It is very uncertain whether fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any… changes signs of acute toxicity during gel application (nausea, gagging,… compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Proportion developing new caries · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or younger (permanent dentition)

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any… led to lower proportion of children developing new caries compared with placebo or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Caries increment in primary/deciduous teeth: decayed, (extraction indicated/missing) and filled teeth d(e/m)ft (prevented fraction) · Children with primary (deciduous) teeth (younger children)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Proportion of children not remaining caries-free · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or younger (permanent dentition)

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any… showed no clear difference in proportion of children not remaining caries-free compared with placebo or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride mouthrinse (any fluoride agent, concentration, volume, frequency or technique; swished and expectorated, not swallowed) vs placebo or no treatment

Dental caries: dmfs increment (primary teeth) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride mouthrinse (any fluoride agent, concentration, volume, frequency or technique; swished and expectorated, not swallowed) vs placebo or no treatment

Proportion developing new caries · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride mouthrinse (any fluoride agent, concentration, volume,… showed no clear difference in proportion of children developing one or more new caries compared with placebo or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review