evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

2,745 questions · 4,389 findings · 203 reviews · Oral Health

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 39 · 0.9%GRADE not reported 3,844 · 87.6%Very low 198 · 4.5%Low 137 · 3.1%Moderate 134 · 3.1%High 37 · 0.8%

rs1126478, co-dominant model (GA genotype) vs GG or AA genotype

Dental caries · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

rs1126478 showed no significant association with dental caries under a co-dominant model (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.32; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Prevalence of GERD/reflux (esophagitis or positive pH testing) · Adults with dental erosion

Among patients with dental erosion, 64% to 75% had GERD or reflux findings across four studies; evidence is ungraded and not pooled.

1 finding from 1 review

Bleaching vs No bleaching (untreated control)

Caries susceptibility, enamel demineralisation, erosion, or microhardness · Permanent teeth or extracted human teeth with artificial lesions

The laboratory studies did not find increased susceptibility to caries or enamel demineralisation, but no firm conclusions can be drawn because of high risk of bias.

1 finding from 1 review

TT genotype of AMELX rs946252 vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs946252

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs946252 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC + CT model: OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.19-2.87) in the Control group: Caries-free subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

No additional acid etching (etch-and-rinse adhesive alone) after Er,Cr:YSGG preparation vs Prior acid etching before etch-and-rinse adhesive after Er,Cr:YSGG preparation

Incidence of microleakage · Er,Cr:YSGG laser-prepared cavities restored with etch-and-rinse adhesive systems (in vitro)

Prior acid etching with etch-and-rinse adhesives did not significantly change microleakage after Er,Cr:YSGG preparation (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.63-2.22; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

T allele of AMELX rs6639060 vs C allele of AMELX rs6639060

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between T allele vs C allele of AMELX rs6639060 and dental caries susceptibility (T vs C model: OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.63-1.85) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

Gastroesophageal or laryngopharyngeal reflux (GERD/LPR) vs Healthy controls

Salivary function impairment (buffering capacity, flow rate, oral pH) · Adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)

Reflux is associated with impaired salivary function (notably reduced buffering capacity) as a proposed pathophysiological mechanism, based on several ungraded studies.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Laryngopharyngeal reflux, gastroesophageal reflux and dental disorders: A systematic review. 2020 All outcomes
    Adult patients in gastroenterology, ENT and dental clinical settings
    Mixed/controversial salivary findings: reduced salivary buffering capacity supported in three studies (Correa, Holbrook, Filipi) with low oral pH and reduced flow as additional factors in GERD patients, but Meurman and Schroeder found no significant salivary abnormalities; no pooled estimate.
    6 studies
    GRADE not reported

Younger children's age (3-5 years) vs Older children (>5 years)

Poor oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) · Children aged 3-12 years

Children aged 3 years had higher odds of poor OHRQoL than older children (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.42-2.57; 2 studies; ungraded).

2 findings from 1 review

TT genotype of AMELX rs2106416 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs2106416

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC genotype of AMELX rs2106416 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC model: OR 1.83, 95% CI 0.47-7.06); certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

TT genotype of ENAM rs3796703 vs CC + CT genotype of ENAM rs3796703

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC + CT genotype of ENAM rs3796703 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC + CT model: OR 2.90, 95% CI 0.92-9.12); certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

Gastroesophageal or laryngopharyngeal reflux (GERD/LPR) vs Healthy controls

Oral/pharyngeal microbiota modifications · Adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)

No eligible studies investigated reflux-related modifications of the oral or pharyngeal microbiota; this is an evidence gap identified by the review.

1 finding from 1 review