What do systematic reviews say?

All exposure-OHRQoL estimates pooled for publication-bias correction (meta-trim sensitivity); specific exposure set not defined in source vs Not specified

A trim-and-fill sensitivity analysis pooling every exposure estimate gave an overall OR of 0.17 (95% CI 0.13-0.21) after correcting for significant publication bias (Fig. 13); this combined estimate spans heterogeneous exposures and is a publication-bias sensitivity result (ungraded).

• The Association of Oral Health Status, demographic characteristics and socioeconomic determinants with Oral… 2020 All outcomes

  Children across multiple countries (Brazil, Hong Kong, Sri Lanka, New Zealand) · Trim-and-fill adjusted (publication-bias corrected), random-effects
  OR 0.17 [0.13, 0.21]
  Studies not reported
  GRADE not reported

Resin-based fissure sealant plus fluoride varnish vs Fluoride varnish

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and… 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The study (Splieth 2001) did not report progression of dentinal carious lesions into enamel or dentine.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in dental caries: prevalence of moderate to extensive caries (ICDAS 3-6) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall (low certainty).

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  RR 1.05 [0.92, 1.20]
  1 study · 271 participants
  Low

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in oral health attitudes (1-7 scale) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall; GRADE not reported.

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  MD 0.04 [-0.04, 0.12]
  1 study · 1607 participants
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in periodontal disease: probing pocket depth (mm) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall (moderate certainty).

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  MD -0.03 [-0.12, 0.06]
  1 study · 270 participants
  Moderate

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in oral-health-related quality of life (OHIP-14) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall (high certainty).

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  MD -0.24 [-1.55, 1.07]
  1 study · 305 participants
  High

Periodontal disease (present) vs Individuals without periodontal disease (by LOA)

Periodontal disease was associated with higher odds of poor OHRQoL (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.12-1.18; 3 studies; no heterogeneity; ungraded).

• The Association of Oral Health Status, demographic characteristics and socioeconomic determinants with Oral… 2020 All outcomes

  Upper-middle-income countries (Brazil); studies 2010-2014
  OR 1.15 [1.12, 1.18]
  3 studies
  GRADE not reported

Female gender (girls) vs Male gender (boys)

Girls had modestly higher odds of poor OHRQoL than boys (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.09-1.17; 3 studies; ungraded).

• The Association of Oral Health Status, demographic characteristics and socioeconomic determinants with Oral… 2020 All outcomes

  Upper-middle-income countries (Brazil); studies 2010-2013
  OR 1.13 [1.09, 1.17]
  3 studies
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 24-month recall

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in oral-health-related quality of life (OHIP-14) compared with clinical examination with 24-month recall (high certainty).

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  MD -0.37 [-1.69, 0.95]
  1 study · 298 participants
  High

Higher dental caries experience vs Caries-free controls

Higher dental caries experience was associated with substantially higher odds of poor OHRQoL (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.43-1.88; 6 studies; high heterogeneity I2=83.5%; ungraded).

• The Association of Oral Health Status, demographic characteristics and socioeconomic determinants with Oral… 2020 All outcomes

  Upper-middle-income countries (5 studies) and one high-income country; studies 2011-2017
  OR 1.66 [1.43, 1.88]
  6 studies
  GRADE not reported

Fluoride varnish vs Fissure sealant (resin-based or glass ionomer)

After excluding Bravo 1996, occlusal caries incidence slightly favored fluoride varnish but was not significant, with heterogeneity falling to 0% (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.16; 3 RCTs; ungraded).

• Comparison between Fissure Sealant and Fluoride Varnish on Caries Prevention for First Permanent Molars: a Systematic… 2020 All outcomes

  2 to 3 years · Sensitivity analysis excluding Bravo 1996 (high risk of bias)
  RR 0.98 [0.82, 1.16]
  3 studies
  GRADE not reported
• Comparison between Fissure Sealant and Fluoride Varnish on Caries Prevention for First Permanent Molars: a Systematic… 2020 All outcomes

  2 to 3 years
  RR 1.33 [0.83, 2.11]
  4 studies · 6551 participants
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in cost (healthcare-system perspective): total cost per patient (GBP) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall; GRADE not reported.

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  MD 13.77 [-1.56, 29.11]
  1 study · 2006 participants
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in cost (patient perspective): total cost per patient (GBP) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall; GRADE not reported.

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  MD -9.49 [-23.05, 4.07]
  1 study · 1944 participants
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in oral health behaviour (1-9 scale) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall; GRADE not reported.

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  MD 0.00 [-0.03, 0.03]
  1 study · 308 participants
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 12-month recall

It is very uncertain whether clinical examination with 24-month recall changes dental caries: dmfs increment (primary teeth) compared with clinical examination with 12-month recall (very low certainty).

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 years · 3-5 year olds (primary teeth)
  MD 0.90 [-0.16, 1.96]
  1 study · 58 participants
  Very low

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in cost (healthcare-system perspective): total cost per patient (GBP) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall; GRADE not reported.

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  MD -16.00 [-51.76, 19.76]
  1 study · 404 participants
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 24-month recall

Clinical examination with risk-based recall probably leads to higher periodontal disease: probing pocket depth (mm) compared with clinical examination with 24-month recall (moderate certainty).

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  MD 0.10 [0.01, 0.19]
  1 study · 279 participants
  Moderate

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 24-month recall

Clinical examination with risk-based recall led to higher patient satisfaction with actual care received (1-7 scale) compared with clinical examination with 24-month recall; GRADE not reported.

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  MD 0.16 [0.01, 0.31]
  1 study · 304 participants
  GRADE not reported

Resin-based fissure sealant plus fluoride varnish vs Fluoride varnish

• Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and… 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Splieth 2001: total time for sealing and resealing two teeth averaged 29 minutes over 2 years (about 17 minutes initial sealants); each fluoride varnish application under 3 minutes (total 9 minutes).
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 12-month recall

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 years
  Summary of findings 1 lists 'Oral-health-related quality of life: Not reported' for the 24-month versus 12-month comparison (Wang 1992 did not measure it).
  0 studies
  No studies found