What do systematic reviews say?

Intervention not reported

• Antihypertensive withdrawal for the prevention of cognitive decline 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 17842 participants
  Very low

Intervention not reported

• Antihypertensive withdrawal for the prevention of cognitive decline 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 3517 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in mortality (at 3 to 4 months' (moderate certainty).

• Antihypertensive withdrawal for the prevention of cognitive decline 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.88 [0.72, 1.08]
  2 studies · 2485 participants
  Moderate

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in cardiovascular events (at 3 to 4 months' (low certainty).

• Antihypertensive withdrawal for the prevention of cognitive decline 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.29 [0.96, 1.72]
  2 studies · 2485 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Antihypertensive withdrawal for the prevention of cognitive decline 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in hospitalisations (at 4 months' (low certainty).

• Antihypertensive withdrawal for the prevention of cognitive decline 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.85 [0.36, 2.06]
  1 study · 388 participants
  Low

Preoperative analgesics (analgesics given before dental treatment) vs Placebo or no analgesics

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preoperative analgesics for additional pain relief in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
  None of the included studies measured completion of treatment. PUB3: 'The [three/four] studies did not measure intraoperative pain, preoperative and postoperative anxiety measures, patient satisfaction, parental…
  0 studies
  No studies found

Preoperative analgesics (analgesics given before dental treatment) vs Placebo or no analgesics

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preoperative analgesics for additional pain relief in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
  None of the included studies reported parental satisfaction. PUB3: 'there was no reporting of participant or parent satisfaction in any included study.'
  0 studies
  No studies found

Preoperative analgesics (analgesics given before dental treatment) vs Placebo or no analgesics

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preoperative analgesics for additional pain relief in children and adolescents having dental treatment 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
  None of the included studies reported patient satisfaction. PUB3: 'there was no reporting of participant or parent satisfaction in any included study.'
  0 studies
  No studies found

Higher drinking-water fluoride exposure vs Lower water fluoride concentration (concurrent control)

Higher water fluoride concentration (fluoridated water; natural or… may leads to higher dental fluorosis of aesthetic concern (Dean's Index, TFI, TSIF) compared with lower water fluoride concentration (concurrent control) (low certainty).

• Water fluoridation for the prevention of dental caries 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Cross-sectional
  OR 2.90 [2.05, 4.10]
  40 studies · 59630 participants
  Low

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The studies did not measure this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall… showed no clear difference in adverse events: gingival bleeding compared with filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue…; GRADE not reported.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Short term (up to 12 months)
  RR 1.69 [0.61, 4.66]
  2 studies · 226 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Long term (12 months)
  RR 1.74 [0.99, 3.06]
  2 studies · 195 participants
  Low

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Satisfaction with treatment: listed in the Summary of findings table with no data; the studies did not measure this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall… probably leads to lower pain compared with filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue… (moderate certainty).

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Long term (12 months to 24 months)
  RR 0.15 [0.04, 0.67]
  2 studies · 312 participants
  Moderate
• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Short term (less than 12 months)
  Short term (less than 12 months): effect not estimable (Analysis 1.2.1; 64 teeth, 32 participants; one study, Hutcheson 2012).
  1 study · 64 participants
  GRADE not reported

Fluoridated milk vs Non-fluoridated milk

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Fluoridated milk for preventing dental caries 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No evidence found. (Correspondence with the author (Maslak 2004) confirmed that no adverse effects were reported.)
  0 studies
  No studies found

Glass ionomer sealant (with fluoride gel plus dentifrice) vs Fluoride gel plus fluoride toothpaste/dentifrice (non-invasive control)

Glass ionomer sealant (with fluoride gel plus dentifrice) showed no clear difference in caries (lesion) progression (radiographic) compared with fluoride gel plus fluoride toothpaste/dentifrice (non-invasive…; GRADE not reported.

• Micro‐invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  12 to 36 months (radiographic follow-up) · Glass ionomer sealant
  OR 0.13 [0.01, 2.52]
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The studies did not measure this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Micro-invasive treatment (proximal sealing or resin infiltration): resin sealant, glass ionomer sealant, polyurethane/adhesive patch, or resin infiltration vs Non-invasive / control treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Micro‐invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  None of the studies reported on participant or operator perception
  0 studies
  No studies found

Adhesive/polyurethane sealant patch vs No treatment (both arms received flossing plus fluoride toothpaste)

Adhesive/polyurethane sealant patch showed no clear difference in caries (lesion) progression (radiographic) compared with no treatment (both arms received flossing plus fluoride toothpaste); GRADE not reported.

• Micro‐invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  12 to 36 months (radiographic follow-up) · Sealant patch
  OR 1.00 [0.14, 7.23]
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Micro-invasive treatment (proximal sealing or resin infiltration): resin sealant, glass ionomer sealant, polyurethane/adhesive patch, or resin infiltration vs Non-invasive / control treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Micro‐invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  None of the studies reported on costs for micro-invasive treatment or non-invasive control
  0 studies
  No studies found