Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

335 questions · 406 findings · 23 reviews

No studies found 93 · 22.9%GRADE not reported 166 · 40.9%Very low 66 · 16.3%Low 65 · 16%Moderate 14 · 3.4%High 2 · 0.5%

440 to 550 ppm F toothpaste vs 250 ppm F toothpaste

Caries increment, surface index D(M)FS · Children and adolescents with immature permanent dentition (aged 5 to 16 years at study start)

440 to 550 ppm F toothpaste showed no clear difference in caries increment, surface index D(M)FS compared with 250 ppm F toothpaste (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

250 ppm F toothpaste vs Non-fluoride (0 ppm F) placebo toothpaste

Proportion developing new caries · Children and adolescents with immature permanent dentition (aged 5 to 16 years at study start)

250 ppm F toothpaste showed no clear difference in proportion developing new caries compared with non-fluoride (0 ppm F) placebo toothpaste (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs Conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments)

Discomfort associated with the procedure · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)

ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (H-GIC), hand… showed no clear difference in participant experience (discomfort during procedure) compared with conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs Amalgam restoration

Restoration failure (primary dentition) · Children with carious primary teeth

ART using H-GIC showed no clear difference in restoration failure (primary teeth) compared with conventional treatment using amalgam; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs Conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments)

Pain (during procedure, primary dentition) · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)

ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (H-GIC), hand… showed no clear difference in pain (during procedure, primary dentition) compared with conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ART using glass ionomer cement (GIC) vs Amalgam restoration

Restoration failure (primary dentition) · Children and adolescents with dental caries (primary teeth and permanent immature teeth)

ART using glass ionomer cement (GIC) showed no clear difference in restoration failure (primary teeth) compared with conventional treatment using amalgam; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

ART using glass ionomer cement (GIC) vs Amalgam restoration

Restoration failure (permanent, immature teeth) · Children and adolescents with dental caries (primary teeth and permanent immature teeth)

ART using glass ionomer cement (GIC) led to higher restoration failure (permanent, immature teeth) compared with conventional treatment using amalgam; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

ART using composite resin vs Conventional treatment using composite resin

Restoration failure (primary dentition) · Children with carious primary teeth

It is very uncertain whether ART using composite resin changes restoration failure (primary dentition) compared with conventional treatment using composite resin (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ART using glass ionomer cement (GIC) vs Amalgam restoration

Pain (permanent, immature teeth) · Children and adolescents with dental caries (primary teeth and permanent immature teeth)

ART using glass ionomer cement (GIC) led to lower pain (permanent, immature teeth) compared with conventional treatment using amalgam; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs Conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments)

Restoration failure (permanent dentition) · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs Conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments)

Restoration failure (primary dentition) · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)

ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (H-GIC), hand… may leads to higher restoration failure (primary dentition) compared with conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ART using glass ionomer cement (GIC) vs Amalgam restoration

Participant experience (co-operation during procedure) · Children and adolescents with dental caries (primary teeth and permanent immature teeth)
1 finding from 1 review

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

Dental fluorosis of aesthetic concern (Dean's Index, TFI, TSIF) · Populations of all ages (mostly children) exposed to drinking water with differing fluoride concentrations

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).

1 finding from 1 review