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.

Criteria-based screening with specific (personalised) referral letter vs Criteria-based screening with non-specific referral letter

Dental attendance at general dentist · School children, secondary school in the UK (aged 11 to 13 years)

It is very uncertain whether criteria-based screening with specific (personalised) referral letter changes dental attendance at general dentist compared with criteria-based screening with non-specific referral letter (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Genetically predicted gene expression (TWAS; S-PrediXcan with GTEx v8 cis-eQTL across 49 tissues; cross-tissue S-MultiXcan) vs ECC-unaffected children (association of genetically predicted expression)

Early childhood caries (ECC) - association with genetically predicted expression of CDH17 (chr8q22.1) · Children up to age 5-6 years (European / European non-Hispanic ancestry); 843 ECC-affected vs 2124 unaffected across 5 cohorts (N=2974)

Genetically predicted expression of CDH17 was significantly associated with ECC in the TWAS (p = 3.32e-8); genetic association, ungraded.

1 finding from 1 review

Bonded Minne appliance (slow maxillary expansion) vs Banded Minne appliance (slow maxillary expansion)

Stability of crossbite correction (relapse of canine expansion) · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…
1 finding from 1 review

Lacebacks with fixed appliances vs Fixed appliances

Size of the lower jaw (arch length) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Lacebacks with fixed appliances showed no clear difference in size of the lower jaw (arch length) compared with fixed appliances only (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with demineralised bone matrix, single particle size vs ARP with demineralised bone matrix, multiple particle size

Complications (e.g. discomfort, pain and swelling) · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…
1 finding from 1 review

Schwarz appliance vs No active treatment (control)

Size of the lower jaw (arch length, change) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Schwarz appliance showed no clear difference in size of the lower jaw (mandibular arch length, change) at 9 months compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with alloplast plus barrier membrane vs ARP with alloplast without membrane

Changes in vertical height of alveolar ridge (mm) · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

It is very uncertain whether ARP with alloplast plus barrier membrane changes changes in vertical height of alveolar ridge (mm) compared with ARP with alloplast without membrane (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with alloplast plus barrier membrane vs ARP with alloplast without membrane

Aesthetic outcomes of future prosthodontic rehabilitation · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Direct composite resin restoration vs Amalgam restoration

Harms (toxicity and postoperative sensitivity) · People with permanent or adult posterior teeth requiring restoration (parallel-group trials involved children aged 6 to 12 years)
1 finding from 1 review

Nitinol archwire vs Titinol archwire

Amount of crowding · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

It is very uncertain whether nitinol archwire changes amount of crowding (change) up to 37 weeks compared with titinol archwire (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Active self-ligating brackets vs Passive self-ligating brackets

Time to alignment · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Active self-ligating brackets showed no clear difference in time to alignment (days) compared with passive self-ligating brackets; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with xenograft (bone graft) vs Extraction alone

Marginal bone level change · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…
1 finding from 1 review

3-month school-based supervised daily tooth-brushing program with fluoridated toothpaste (multilevel: trained school nurses plus parental involvement) vs Pre-intervention

Visible plaque and oral-hygiene behavior · Schoolchildren aged 4-6 years in the United Arab Emirates (Dubai)

One pre-post study of a school-based supervised tooth-brushing program found visible plaque fell from 76.8% to 36.7% with positive behavior change (narrative synthesis; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with xenograft (bone graft) vs Extraction alone

Changes in bucco-lingual/palatal width of alveolar ridge (mm) · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

It is very uncertain whether ARP with xenograft (bone graft) changes changes in bucco-lingual/palatal width of alveolar ridge (mm) compared with extraction alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review