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.

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (Hyrax) vs observation

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (Hyrax) probably leads to higher molar expansion (inter-molar distance) compared with observation (no treatment) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with allograft (bone graft) vs ARP with xenograft

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 allograft changes changes in bucco-lingual/palatal width of alveolar ridge (mm) compared with ARP with xenograft (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Eruption guidance appliance vs No active treatment (control)

Amount of crowding (number of children with crowding, mandible) after 1 year · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

It is very uncertain whether eruption guidance appliance changes amount of crowding (number of children with crowding, mandible)… compared with no active treatment (control) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Bone-borne expansion vs observation

Crossbite correction · 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
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Adolescents
    Alberta 2010: bone-borne expansion corrected all posterior crossbites (21/21); no self-correction in the untreated group
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

ARP with alloplast vs ARP with xenograft

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 changes changes in vertical height of alveolar ridge (mm) compared with ARP with xenograft (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Direct composite resin restoration vs Amalgam restoration

Allergic reaction · People with permanent or adult posterior teeth requiring restoration (parallel-group trials involved children aged 6 to 12 years)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with alloplast vs Extraction alone

Need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement · 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

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

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

Self-ligating brackets vs Conventional brackets

Lower incisor inclination (lingual tipping and retrusion) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Self-ligating brackets showed no clear difference in lower incisors to mandible (inclination, degrees) compared with conventional brackets; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Coaxial nickel-titanium archwire vs Nickel-titanium archwire

Amount of tooth movement / reduction in crowding at 12 weeks · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

It is very uncertain whether coaxial nickel-titanium archwire changes amount of tooth movement / reduction in crowding at 12 weeks compared with nickel-titanium archwire (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy vs no treatment

Canine expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy showed no clear difference in canine expansion compared with no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    12 months after start of treatment
    U-bow activator 3.6 mm vs untreated 1 mm; P<0.001 (no SD reported); significant in favour of treatment
    1 study · 66 participants
    GRADE not reported

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) vs Removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate)

Canine expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) may leads to higher canine expansion (inter-canine distance) compared with removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Quad-helix plus multi-bracket appliance vs Expansion arch plus multi-bracket appliance

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Quad-helix plus multi-bracket appliance showed no clear difference in molar expansion compared with expansion arch plus multi-bracket appliance; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) vs Removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate)

Length of treatment · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) probably leads to lower length of treatment compared with removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review