Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

338 questions · 369 findings · 33 reviews

No studies found 91 · 24.7%GRADE not reported 68 · 18.4%Very low 125 · 33.9%Low 49 · 13.3%Moderate 32 · 8.7%High 4 · 1.1%

Diode laser, near infrared (850 nm to 980 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Diode laser, near infrared (850 nm to 980 nm) led to lower changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Diode laser, near infrared (700 nm to 850 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Diode laser, near infrared (700 nm to 850 nm) showed no clear difference in changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Er:YAG laser (erbium-doped:yttrium-aluminum-garnet) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Outcome not reported · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    We did not find any eligible study to evaluate erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) or carbon dioxide (CO2) laser compared with placebo/no treatment.
    0 studies
    No studies found

Nd:YAG laser vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Nd:YAG laser (neodymium-doped:yttrium-aluminum-garnet) showed no clear difference in changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

3 findings from 1 review

Nd:YAG laser vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Nd:YAG laser (neodymium-doped:yttrium-aluminum-garnet) showed no clear difference in changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Er,Cr:YSGG laser (erbium,chromium:yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Er,Cr:YSGG laser (erbium,chromium:yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet) led to lower changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

3 findings from 1 review

Er,Cr:YSGG laser (erbium,chromium:yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Er,Cr:YSGG laser (erbium,chromium:yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet) showed no clear difference in changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Surgical removal of the lesion (surgical excision, laser surgery, cryotherapy) vs Placebo or no treatment

Outcome not reported · People with a diagnosis of oral leukoplakia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • 'We did not identify any RCTs that compared surgical treatments with placebo or no treatment.' Three surgical RCTs were found (Chee 2013, Lopez-Jornet 2013, Schwarz 2005) but all excluded because they did not include a…
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy

Structural outcome ‐ retinal detachment · preterm infants with type 1 ROP

It is very uncertain whether anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy changes structural outcome ‐ retinal detachment compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy

Structural outcome ‐ complete retinal detachment (unit of analysis: eyes) · preterm infants with type 1 ROP

It is very uncertain whether anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy changes structural outcome ‐ complete retinal detachment (unit of analysis:… compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy

Refractive error ‐ very high myopia ‐ at 30 months of age (unit of analysis: eyes) · preterm infants with type 1 ROP

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy may leads to lower refractive error ‐ very high myopia ‐ at 30 months of age (unit of… compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy

Mortality before hospital discharge · preterm infants with type 1 ROP

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy showed no clear difference in mortality before discharge from primary hospital compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy

Mortality at 30 months of age · preterm infants with type 1 ROP

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy showed no clear difference in mortality at 30 months of age compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy

Local adverse effects ‐ corneal opacity requiring corneal transplant (unit of analysis: eyes) · preterm infants with type 1 ROP

It is very uncertain whether anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy changes local adverse effects ‐ corneal opacity requiring corneal transplant… compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy

Local adverse effects ‐ lens opacity requiring cataract removal (unit of analysis: eyes) · preterm infants with type 1 ROP

It is very uncertain whether anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy changes local adverse effects ‐ lens opacity requiring cataract removal… compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy

Recurrence of ROP (up to 6 months of age) · preterm infants with type 1 ROP

It is very uncertain whether anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy changes recurrence of ROP (up to 6 months of age) compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy

Recurrence of ROP (unit of analysis: eyes) · preterm infants with type 1 ROP

It is very uncertain whether anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy changes recurrence of ROP (unit of analysis: eyes) compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Placebo (sham irradiation, laser inactive) vs Control (no laser device used)

Maximum pain (verbal rating scale, VRS) · People requiring retreatment of periapical lesions (failed root canal therapy)

Placebo (sham irradiation, laser inactive) led to lower maximum pain (verbal rating scale, VRS) compared with control (no laser device used); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Systemic administration of beta‐blockers vs placebo or no treatment

Treatment with laser photocoagulation or cryotherapy · Prevention of retinopathy of prematurity in preterm infants

Systemic administration of beta‐blockers may leads to lower treatment with laser photocoagulation or cryotherapy compared with placebo or no treatment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review