Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

558 questions · 704 findings · 64 reviews · Dental caries

No studies found 91 · 12.9%GRADE not reported 441 · 62.6%Very low 76 · 10.8%Low 73 · 10.4%Moderate 21 · 3%High 2 · 0.3%

Intervention not reported

Dental caries prevalence in permanent teeth (cavitated lesions) · Children aged 11-13 years in Latin America and the Caribbean

In other Latin American/Caribbean countries, pooled permanent-teeth caries prevalence was 64% (95% CI 45-79%), not significantly different from Brazil (p=0.42); certainty not graded.

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Dental caries prevalence in primary teeth (cavitated lesions) · Children aged 5-6 years in Latin America and the Caribbean

In Brazil, pooled primary-teeth caries prevalence in 5-6 year-olds was 52% (95% CI 49-54%); certainty not graded.

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Dental caries prevalence in primary teeth (cavitated lesions) · Children aged 5-6 years in Latin America and the Caribbean

About 56% of 5-6 year-old children in Latin America and the Caribbean had dental caries in primary teeth (95% CI 52-59%); certainty not graded.

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Dental caries prevalence in permanent teeth (cavitated lesions) · Children aged 11-13 years in Latin America and the Caribbean

In Brazil, pooled permanent-teeth caries prevalence in 11-13 year-olds was 56% (95% CI 53-60%), with a significant declining trend over time; certainty not graded.

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Dental caries prevalence in permanent teeth (cavitated lesions) · Children aged 11-13 years in Latin America and the Caribbean

About 58% of 11-13 year-old children in Latin America and the Caribbean had dental caries in permanent teeth (95% CI 54-61%); certainty not graded.

1 finding from 1 review

Xylitol sucking tablets (1 g/day) vs no treatment

Number of infants with a caries increment · Infants/young children (primary teeth; baseline about 1 to 3 years)

Xylitol sucking tablets (1 g/day) showed no clear difference in number of infants with a caries increment compared with no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Chlorhexidine varnish (10% and 40%) vs placebo or no treatment

Caries increment in permanent teeth · Children and adolescents below 18 years at study start (included studies: children from birth to 15 years), with mixed, permanent or…

It is very uncertain whether chlorhexidine varnish (10% and 40%) changes caries increment in permanent dentition (DMFS; higher values… compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chlorhexidine gel (0.12%) vs no treatment

Presence of new caries in the primary teeth · Children and adolescents below 18 years at study start (included studies: children from birth to 15 years), with mixed, permanent or…

It is very uncertain whether chlorhexidine gel (0.12%) changes presence of new caries in the primary teeth compared with no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chlorhexidine varnish vs placebo or no treatment

Dental caries: dmfs increment (primary teeth) · Children and adolescents below 18 years at study start (included studies: children from birth to 15 years), with mixed, permanent or…
1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) vs Topical fluoride (fluoride rinse, varnish or toothpaste)

Fluorosis (adverse effect; % of children with fluorotic teeth) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) vs No fluoride supplement (placebo or no treatment)

Fluorosis (adverse effect; % of children with fluorotic teeth, questionable to severe) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less
1 finding from 1 review

Dental fillings (restorations) vs Dental extractions

Outcome not reported · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Teledentistry diagnosis using DSLR or smartphone extra-oral photographs vs Visual or clinical examination

Positive predictive value for dental caries diagnosis · Children and adults with primary or permanent dentition

Positive predictive values were reported in 10 of the 13 studies that reported sensitivity and specificity; no meta-analysis or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Teledentistry diagnosis using DSLR or smartphone extra-oral photographs vs Visual or clinical examination

Negative predictive value for dental caries diagnosis · Children and adults with primary or permanent dentition

Negative predictive values were reported in 10 of the 13 studies that reported sensitivity and specificity; no meta-analysis or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Probiotics vs placebo or control

Dental caries in children · Children and/or adolescents (<18 years) without background systemic disease

Probiotics probably make little to no difference to the number of dental caries versus control (MD -0.24 carious pieces, 95%CI -0.72 to 0.23; low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Teledentistry diagnosis using DSLR or smartphone extra-oral photographs vs Visual or clinical examination

Sensitivity for dental caries diagnosis · Children and adults with primary or permanent dentition

Sensitivity ranged from 48% to 98.3% across 13 studies; no meta-analysis or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Teledentistry diagnosis using DSLR or smartphone extra-oral photographs vs Visual or clinical examination

Specificity for dental caries diagnosis · Children and adults with primary or permanent dentition

Specificity ranged from 83% to 100% across 13 studies; no meta-analysis or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Analogue (conventional) radiographs vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
17 findings from 1 review
Show 14 more findings

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
3 findings from 1 review