Gap finder
Search review questions
Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.
830 questions in 43 reviews · Orthodontics
current versionsNo studies 186 · 22.4%Ungraded 410 · 49.4%Very low 122 · 14.7%Low 79 · 9.5%Moderate 30 · 3.6%High 3 · 0.4%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
| Question | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Ledermix root canal medicament (day 0 to 10) vs Ultracal root canal medicament (day 7 to 10) Tooth survival at 12 months · People with avulsed and replanted permanent (front) teeth · 12 months Interventions for treating traumatised permanent front teeth: avulsed (knocked out) and replanted (2019) · Cochrane | Tooth survival at 12 months: Not estimable (due to no events in either arm); 27 teeth in 22 patients (1 RCT). At 12 months, no teeth were lost. 1 tooth was lost at 16 months in the Ultracal group. | 1 study · 22 participants | Very low |
Patient-used 250 ppm F mouthrinse (100 ppm amine F/150 ppm NaF), daily vs 0 ppm F placebo mouthrinse, daily Number of participants with more severe DLs (severity of DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond (end of orthodontic treatment) Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | SoF 4. Number of participants with more severe DLs: none of the trials reported this outcome. | 0 studies | No studies |
Intraoral fluoride-releasing glass bead device attached to the brace vs 250 ppm F (daily) fluoride mouthrinse Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond; follow-up 19 months Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | RR 1.51 [0.73, 3.10] | 1 study · 37 participants | Very low |
Storage of the tooth prior to replantation (storage medium) vs Different storage medium or dry storage Outcome NR · People with avulsed and replanted permanent (front) teeth Interventions for treating traumatised permanent front teeth: avulsed (knocked out) and replanted (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies |
Patient-used 250 ppm F mouthrinse (100 ppm amine F/150 ppm NaF), daily vs 0 ppm F placebo mouthrinse, daily Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond; follow-up 24.5 months (assessed with QLF) Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.65 [0.37, 1.17] | 1 study · 81 participants | Very low |
Extra-oral pulp extirpation at day 0 vs Intra-oral pulp extirpation at day 7 Radiographic resorption (proxy measure for periodontal healing) at 12 months · People with avulsed and replanted permanent (front) teeth · 12 months Interventions for treating traumatised permanent front teeth: avulsed (knocked out) and replanted (2019) · Cochrane | RR 1.35 [0.81, 2.24] | 1 study · 19 participants | Very low |
Hyperbaric oxygen (following replantation) vs Control Pulpal healing at 12 months · People with avulsed and replanted permanent (front) teeth · 12 months Interventions for treating traumatised permanent front teeth: avulsed (knocked out) and replanted (2019) · Cochrane | RR 1.25 [1.06, 1.48] | 1 study · 69 participants | Very low |
Hyperbaric oxygen (following replantation) vs Control Periodontal healing at 12 months · People with avulsed and replanted permanent (front) teeth · 12 months Interventions for treating traumatised permanent front teeth: avulsed (knocked out) and replanted (2019) · Cochrane | RR 2.04 [1.52, 2.73] | 1 study · 69 participants | Very low |
Thymosin alpha 1 (10-minute soak prior to replantation) vs Control (saline) Periodontal healing at 48 months · People with avulsed and replanted permanent (front) teeth · 48 months Interventions for treating traumatised permanent front teeth: avulsed (knocked out) and replanted (2019) · Cochrane | RR 5.60 [2.22, 14.11] | 1 study · 73 participants | Very low |
Patient-used 5000 ppm F toothpaste, daily vs 1450 ppm F (conventional) toothpaste, daily Adverse effects · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond (end of orthodontic treatment) Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | SoF 3. Adverse effects: none of the trials reported this outcome. | 0 studies | No studies |
Patient-used 5000 ppm F toothpaste, daily throughout treatment vs 1450 ppm F (conventional) toothpaste, daily Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond; follow-up 1.8 years Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.68 [0.46, 1.00] | 1 study · 380 participants | Low |
Professionally-applied 12,300 ppm F APF foam, every 2 months vs 0 ppm F placebo foam Number of participants with more severe DLs (severity of DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond (end of orthodontic treatment) Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | SoF 2. Number of participants with more severe DLs: none of the trials reported this outcome. | 0 studies | No studies |
Ledermix root canal medicament (day 0 to 10) vs Ultracal root canal medicament (day 7 to 10) Periodontal healing at 12 months (tooth level) · People with avulsed and replanted permanent (front) teeth · 12 months Interventions for treating traumatised permanent front teeth: avulsed (knocked out) and replanted (2019) · Cochrane | RR 1.67 [0.80, 3.49] | 1 study · 22 participants | Very low |
12,500 ppm F (NaF/olaflur/dectaflur) amine fluoride gel vs 0 ppm F placebo gel Adverse effects · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond; mean follow-up 16.6 months Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | Additional SoF Table 1. Adverse effects: with placebo gel 0.60%; with fluoride gel 0.00% (0 to 0); difference 0.60% fewer (0.60 fewer to 0.60 fewer); relative effect not estimable; 312 participants (1 RCT); certainty… | 1 study · 312 participants | Very low |
Professionally-applied 12,300 ppm F APF foam, every 2 months vs 0 ppm F placebo foam Number of participants with new demineralised lesions (DLs) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond; mean follow-up 18 months Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.26 [0.11, 0.57] | 1 study · 95 participants | Low |
1400/250 ppm F (amine F/SnF2) toothpaste + mouthrinse, daily vs 1400/250 ppm F (NaF) toothpaste + mouthrinse, daily Visible plaque index (mean change from baseline) · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond; follow-up 1.5 years Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | MD -0.09 [-0.18, 0] | 1 study · 97 participants | Very low |
Professionally-applied 12,300 ppm F APF foam, every 2 months vs 0 ppm F placebo foam Adverse effects · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond (end of orthodontic treatment) Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | SoF 2. Adverse effects: none of the trials reported this outcome. | 0 studies | No studies |
Professionally-applied fluoride varnish (7700 or 10,000 ppm F), every 6 weeks vs Non-fluoride (placebo) varnish Adverse effects · Orthodontic patients of any age with fixed braces (new DLs assessed at debond) · At debond; follow-up 1.7 years Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment (2019) · Cochrane | SoF 1. Adverse effects: no evidence that the intervention had adverse effects; only 1 participant with an adverse event and unclear if directly related to the intervention. 148 participants (1 RCT, Sonesson 2019);… | 1 study · 148 participants | Low |
Thymosin alpha 1 (10-minute soak prior to replantation) vs Control (saline) Tooth survival at 48 months · People with avulsed and replanted permanent (front) teeth · 48 months Interventions for treating traumatised permanent front teeth: avulsed (knocked out) and replanted (2019) · Cochrane | RR 3.58 [1.86, 6.89] | 1 study · 73 participants | Very low |
Orthodontic treatment without extraction of permanent teeth vs Orthodontic treatment involving extraction of permanent teeth Dento-occlusal results of treatment, measured with the PAR index · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth) Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children (2018) · Cochrane | No data are available as no RCTs or CCTs have been conducted. | 0 studies | No studies |
Fixed functional appliance (FORSUS FRD) vs Fixed functional appliance with mini-implants (FMI) Final overjet · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -0.36 [-1.07, 0.35] | 1 study · 29 participants | Ungraded |
Early treatment (two-phase) with headgear vs Early treatment (two-phase) with functional appliance Incidence of incisal trauma · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) · End of orthodontic treatment (phase II) Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | OR 0.78 [0.42, 1.47] | 2 studies · 226 participants | Ungraded |
Early treatment (two-phase) with headgear vs Early treatment (two-phase) with functional appliance Final ANB · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) · End of orthodontic treatment (phase II) Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -0.17 [-0.67, 0.34] | 2 studies · 222 participants | Ungraded |
Orthodontic treatment without extraction of permanent teeth vs Orthodontic treatment involving extraction of permanent teeth Gingival and TMJ symptoms · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth) Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children (2018) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies |
Fixed functional appliance (FORSUS FRD) vs Fixed functional appliance with mini-implants (FMI) Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD 0.22 [-0.86, 1.3] | 2 studies · 60 participants | Ungraded |
Orthodontic treatment without extraction of permanent teeth vs Orthodontic treatment involving extraction of permanent teeth Quality of life · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth) Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children (2018) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies |
Orthodontic treatment without extraction of permanent teeth (removable, fixed, or functional braces, or headgear) vs No treatment (or delayed treatment) Side effects · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth) Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children (2018) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies |
Chemical cured composite vs Conventional (chemical cured) glass ionomer cement Decalcification · Patients with fixed orthodontic appliances attached to their teeth · To end of appliance treatment Adhesives for fixed orthodontic brackets (2018) · Cochrane | It was surprising that decalcification rates were not reported as a secondary outcome, as clinically it is suggested that GIC is protective against decalcification; the… | 0 studies | No studies |
Twin Block functional appliance vs Other functional appliances (Bionator, Herbst, R-appliance, Dynamax, Bite-Jumping) Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -0.56 [-0.96, -0.16] | 6 studies · 320 participants | Low |
Orthodontic treatment without extraction of permanent teeth vs Orthodontic treatment involving extraction of permanent teeth Duration of treatment · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth) Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children (2018) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies |
Fixed functional appliance (FORSUS FRD) vs Fixed functional appliance with mini-implants (FMI) Patient satisfaction · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | OR 0.18 [0.01, 3.97] | 1 study · 32 participants | Ungraded |
Orthodontic treatment without extraction of permanent teeth (removable, fixed, or functional braces, or headgear) vs No treatment (or delayed treatment) Cephalometric measurements (ANB change and front teeth inclination changes) · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth) Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children (2018) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies |
Activator functional appliance vs Prefabricated functional myobrace appliance (PFA) Final overjet · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -0.6 [-1.63, 0.43] | 1 study · 97 participants | Ungraded |
R-appliance vs Anterior inclined bite plate (AIBP) Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -0.3 [-0.99, 0.39] | 1 study · 50 participants | Ungraded |
Orthodontic treatment without extraction of permanent teeth vs Orthodontic treatment involving extraction of permanent teeth Side effects · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth) Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children (2018) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies |
Early treatment (two-phase: phase 1 in childhood, phase 2 in adolescence) with functional appliance vs Late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with functional appliance Self concept · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) · End of orthodontic treatment (phase II) Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -0.83 [-3.97, 2.31] | 1 study · 132 participants | Ungraded |
Early treatment (two-phase) with headgear vs Late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with headgear PAR score · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) · End of orthodontic treatment (phase II) Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -1.55 [-3.7, 0.6] | 2 studies · 177 participants | Ungraded |
Orthodontic treatment without extraction of permanent teeth vs Orthodontic treatment involving extraction of permanent teeth Cephalometric measurements (ANB change and front teeth inclination changes) · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth) Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children (2018) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies |
Early treatment (two-phase) with headgear vs Early treatment (two-phase) with functional appliance Incidence of incisal trauma · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) · End of phase I (growth modification phase) Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | OR 1.02 [0.48, 2.17] | 2 studies · 282 participants | Ungraded |
Late treatment (one-phase) with removable functional appliance vs No treatment Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -2.37 [-3.01, -1.74] | 2 studies · 99 participants | Low |
Late treatment (one-phase) with fixed functional appliance vs No treatment Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -0.53 [-1.27, 0.22] | 3 studies · 89 participants | Low |
Activator functional appliance vs Fixed functional appliance (FORSUS FRD EZ) Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -1.74 [-3.28, -0.2] | 1 study · 24 participants | Ungraded |
Early treatment (two-phase) with headgear vs Late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with headgear Incidence of new incisal trauma · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) · End of orthodontic treatment (phase II) Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | OR 0.45 [0.25, 0.8] | 2 studies · 237 participants | Low |
Early treatment (two-phase: phase 1 in childhood, phase 2 in adolescence) with functional appliance vs Late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with functional appliance Incidence of new incisal trauma · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) · End of orthodontic treatment (phase II) Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | OR 0.56 [0.33, 0.95] | 3 studies · 332 participants | Moderate |
Removable functional appliance vs Fixed functional appliance Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -1.04 [-1.6, -0.49] | 3 studies · 185 participants | Low |
Chemical cured composite vs Light cured composite Bracket (bond) failure · Patients with fixed orthodontic appliances attached to their teeth · To end of appliance treatment Adhesives for fixed orthodontic brackets (2018) · Cochrane | Additional Table 1 summarises the proportion of bracket failures for a CC and LC composite with two different bracket bases (O'Brien 1989). The paper reported the results of applying a Mantel-Haenszel Chi2 test which… | 1 study · 52 participants | Ungraded |
Early treatment (two-phase: phase 1 in childhood, phase 2 in adolescence) with functional appliance vs Late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with functional appliance Final overjet · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) · End of phase I (growth modification phase) Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -4.17 [-4.61, -3.73] | 3 studies · 432 participants | Ungraded |
Composite (chemical or light cured) vs Resin-modified glass ionomer cement Outcome NR · Patients with fixed orthodontic appliances attached to their teeth · To end of appliance treatment Adhesives for fixed orthodontic brackets (2018) · Cochrane | No included studies involved a comparison with resin-modified glass ionomer cement (a planned adhesive group). The authors recommended future randomised controlled trials involving resin-modified light cured glass… | 0 studies | No studies |
Orthodontic treatment without extraction of permanent teeth (removable, fixed, or functional braces, or headgear) vs No treatment (or delayed treatment) Gingival and TMJ symptoms · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth) Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children (2018) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies |
Harvold Activator vs Frankel function regulator Overjet change · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II… · End of orthodontic treatment Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents (2018) · Cochrane | MD -2.93 [-5.37, -0.49] | 1 study · 25 participants | Ungraded |