Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

439 questions · 686 findings · 68 reviews

No studies found 4 · 0.6%GRADE not reported 617 · 89.9%Very low 26 · 3.8%Low 20 · 2.9%Moderate 11 · 1.6%High 8 · 1.2%

Caries assessment at dentine threshold (cavitation into dentine) vs None (descriptive prevalence review; subgroup analyses by urban/rural status, country and year)

Dental caries prevalence · European adolescents aged 12–19 years

Caries prevalence at the dentine threshold was about 56% (pooled 0.56, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.68; 15 studies; not GRADE-rated).

7 findings from 1 review
Show 4 more findings

Caries assessment at enamel threshold vs None (descriptive prevalence review; subgroup analyses by urban/rural status, country and year)

Dental caries prevalence · European adolescents aged 12–19 years

Enamel-threshold caries prevalence in subgroup 'Region: non-Scandinavian' was 0.74 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.96; 11 studies).

11 findings from 1 review
Show 8 more findings

Primary school-based interventions (one or more of: school health policy, oral health education, healthy school environment, access to oral health services, community involvement) vs usual practice

Oral hygiene measured by mean gingival scores · Primary school children (aged 3-16 years) attending primary school in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

The effect of school-based interventions on gingival scores is uncertain and not statistically significant (SMD 0.12; very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Primary school-based interventions (one or more of: school health policy, oral health education, healthy school environment, access to oral health services, community involvement) vs usual practice

Dental caries · Primary school children (aged 3-16 years) attending primary school in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

Among children aged 6-8 years, DMFT scores were significantly reduced (SMD -0.11); subgroup not separately GRADE-rated.

8 findings from 1 review
Show 5 more findings

Primary school-based interventions (one or more of: school health policy, oral health education, healthy school environment, access to oral health services, community involvement) vs usual practice

Annual increment in DMFS (D3) · Primary school children (aged 3-16 years) attending primary school in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

Oral-health-education interventions significantly reduced net increment in DMFS (SMD -1.05); no significant subgroup difference vs other interventions (P=0.74).

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

Caries distribution assessment (individual, tooth and surface levels) vs None (descriptive prevalence review; subgroup analyses by urban/rural status, country and year)

Caries distribution (individual/tooth/surface level) · European adolescents aged 12–19 years

Caries distribution was skewed at individual, tooth and surface levels and too heterogeneous to meta-analyze (narrative synthesis of 11 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Primary school-based interventions (one or more of: school health policy, oral health education, healthy school environment, access to oral health services, community involvement) vs usual practice

Dental caries prevalence measured by dmft or DMFT/S score greater than one · Primary school children (aged 3-16 years) attending primary school in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

School-based interventions may reduce the prevalence of dental caries (RR 0.70, favouring intervention), but the certainty of evidence is very low.

3 findings from 1 review

Sociodemographic / socioeconomic factors (single-parent family, low parental education, family income, socioeconomic status) vs Absence of the factor / reference socioeconomic category

Caries increment in permanent teeth · School children and adolescents (6-18 years) followed from primary dentition (baseline examination before 72 months of age)

Evidence on the association between sociodemographic/socioeconomic factors and permanent-teeth caries is weak and inconsistent (3 studies; could not be pooled; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

High-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (HVGIC) restoration (conventional restorative approach) vs Compomer, composite resin, or another HVGIC

Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with previously unrestored, vital carious lesions in primary teeth (no pulp therapy); aged 1.5-11 years

High-viscosity GIC had a wide annual failure rate (2.9-25.6%) and was outperformed by compomer/composite in some trials (3 RCTs); low quality of evidence (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Not applicable (single-group prevalence) vs Not applicable

Caries experience (mean DMFT) · Children aged 12 years (plus or minus one year) in Africa

The pooled mean DMFT score was 1.0900 (95% CI 0.9143 to 1.2657); GRADE was not reported.

2 findings 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 rs76823412 (8:134690570; nearest gene(s) ST3GAL1) · 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 rs8091366 near CHST9, KCTD1 showed suggestive (not genome-wide significant) association with ECC (Z = 4.476, p = 7.60e-6); genetic association, ungraded.

2 findings from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs placebo

Oral health-related quality of life · Children with dental caries

SDF did not significantly differ from placebo for oral health-related quality of life in children (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.22; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral health education only (verbal, written, or audio-visual education) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience at the surface level (dmfs/defs) · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Oral-health-education-only interventions did not show a statistically significant effect on surface-level caries (dmfs SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.03; 2 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Caries in first and second primary molars vs Reference (other primary tooth locations / caries-free)

Caries development in permanent teeth · School children and adolescents (6-18 years) followed from primary dentition (baseline examination before 72 months of age)

Caries in the first and second primary molars is the strongest tooth-specific predictor of caries in permanent teeth (RR 3.4; single study; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

SDF applied biannually (every 6 months) vs Other non/minimally-invasive treatment (ART or 5% NaF varnish)

Caries arrest · Children (age 1-10 years) with active cavitated dentin caries lesions in primary molars

Biannual SDF application significantly arrested caries (pooled ES 0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.60; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART)

Oral health-related quality of life · Children with dental caries

SDF did not significantly differ from atraumatic restorative treatment for oral health-related quality of life (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.36; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review