Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

3,556 questions · 10,375 findings · 429 reviews · Oral Health

No studies found 1,344 · 13%GRADE not reported 6,832 · 65.9%Very low 1,228 · 11.8%Low 613 · 5.9%Moderate 290 · 2.8%High 68 · 0.7%

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

Chlorhexidine vs boric acid

Reduction in level of contamination by particles >5 um (droplets) at <2 m from patient's oral cavity · Dental patients undergoing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) and the dental healthcare providers treating them

It is very uncertain whether chlorhexidine (CHX) changes reduction in level of contamination by particles >5 um (droplets) at… compared with boric acid (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Glass ionomer-based sealant vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Retention of sealant (complete or partial retention) · Children with caries-free primary first molars (with or without caries on other teeth), aged 1-5 years (paediatric clinic/dental school,…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Sealants for preventing dental caries in primary teeth 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
    6-30 months
    Chadwick 2005: one or more sealants fully/partially retained in 69 (31.2%) children at 12-30 months; Joshi 2019: at 12 months 75 (43.6%) teeth completely retained, 58 (33.7%) partially retained, 39 (22.7%) completely…
    2 studies
    GRADE not reported

High-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (HVGIC) restoration (conventional restorative approach) vs Resin composite restoration

Restoration failure · Children with carious primary teeth

No comparative effect estimate was reported; composite resin outperformed HVGIC in the review narrative.

1 finding from 1 review

Preformed metal crown (PMC) vs Resin-modified glass-ionomer cement + composite resin (modified open-sandwich restoration)

Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with carious primary molars treated by pulpotomy (vital pulp therapy)

Preformed metal crowns had a low annual failure rate (2.5%) in primary molars after pulpotomy, but the evidence is of low quality (single high-risk-of-bias split-mouth RCT; not GRADE-rated).

2 findings from 1 review

Antiretroviral therapy (any, including cART) vs No antiretroviral medication (treatment-naive)

Mucocele prevalence · Children and adolescents (<18 years) living with HIV (CLWH)

No significant difference in mucocele between CLWH with and without ART (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Antibiotic prophylaxis before dental procedure vs placebo or no prophylaxis

Mortality or serious adverse events requiring hospital admission · Adults or children at increased risk of bacterial endocarditis (pre-existing cardiac condition) undergoing an invasive dental procedure

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Single-visit root canal treatment vs Multiple-visit root canal treatment (two or more visits)

Pain at two weeks (postobturation) · People aged 10 years or above requiring root canal treatment; permanent teeth with completely formed apex and without internal resorption

Single-visit root canal treatment showed no clear difference in pain at two weeks (postobturation) compared with multiple-visit root canal treatment (two or more visits); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

HVGIC with chlorhexidine cavity disinfectant vs HVGIC without cavity disinfectant

Restoration failure · Children with carious primary teeth

No comparative effect estimate was reported; cavity disinfectant did not affect success in the review narrative.

1 finding from 1 review

Common genetic variants genome-wide (GWAS; ~3.9 million SNPs with MAF > 5%) vs ECC-unaffected children (per-allele case-control association)

Early childhood caries (ECC) - association at lead SNP rs1044956 (7:24854765; nearest gene(s) OSBPL3, NPVF) · Children up to age 5-6 years (European / European non-Hispanic ancestry); 843 ECC-affected vs 2124 unaffected across 5 cohorts (N=2974)

The common variant rs1044956 near OSBPL3, NPVF showed suggestive (not genome-wide significant) association with ECC (Z = 4.551, p = 5.35e-6); genetic association, ungraded.

2 findings from 1 review

Combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) vs No antiretroviral medication (treatment-naive)

Oral candidiasis prevalence · Children and adolescents (<18 years) living with HIV (CLWH)

cART was associated with a significantly lower prevalence of oral candidiasis in CLWH (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Autopolymerised sealant vs Light polymerised sealant

Retention of sealant (complete or partial retention) · Children with sound primary molars, aged 2-4 years (municipal dental clinics or hospital paediatric clinics, Denmark)

It is very uncertain whether autopolymerised sealant changes retention of sealant (complete or partial retention) compared with light polymerised sealant (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride-releasing resin-based sealant vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Retention of sealant (complete or partial retention) · Children with caries-free or non-cavitated carious lesion primary molars, aged 3-7 years (paediatric department, dental hospital, France)
1 finding from 1 review
  • Sealants for preventing dental caries in primary teeth 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
    12-24 months
    At 12 months, sealants on 96 (70.1%) surfaces completely retained, 25 (18.3%) partially retained, 16 (11.6%) completely lost; at 24 months, 58 (45.3%) completely retained, 29 (22.7%) partially retained, 41 (32%)…
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Monotherapy or dual antiretroviral therapy vs No antiretroviral medication (treatment-naive)

Oral candidiasis prevalence · Children and adolescents (<18 years) living with HIV (CLWH)

Oral candidiasis prevalence did not differ significantly between treatment-naive CLWH and those on monotherapy or dual therapy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) of self-regulation vs Standard referral letter

Proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of dental care) · School children, primary schools in the USA

It is very uncertain whether referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) of… changes proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of… compared with standard referral letter (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review