evidencegaps
Search

What do systematic reviews say?

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

1,171 questions · 1,373 findings · 60 reviews · Dental caries

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 282 · 20.5%GRADE not reported 606 · 44.1%Very low 257 · 18.7%Low 160 · 11.7%Moderate 66 · 4.8%High 2 · 0.1%

Cone beam computed tomography (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…
3 findings from 1 review

Electrical conductance devices (electronic caries monitor (ECM) and/or CarieScan Pro), used as an adjunct to clinical oral examination vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Specificity for detection of enamel caries · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or extracted teeth of…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Electrical conductance for the detection of dental caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    SoF findings (HSROC; no summary operating point reported): 'ECM: specificity from 0.73 to 0.96 ... CarieScan Pro: specificity from 0 to 1.00'. Across all 7 studies (8 datasets), covering 719 tooth surfaces or sites (no…
    7 studies
    Very low

Fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

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…
1 finding from 1 review

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Stepwise carious tissue removal (SW)

Efficiency, costs or cost-effectiveness · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…
1 finding from 1 review

Other visual classification systems (unspecified or unique systems, e.g. Nyvad, Downer, Lussi, UniViSS) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Sensitivity for detection of 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

Visual caries detection (ICDAS visual/visual-tactile inspection) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Sensitivity for detection of 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

Any of the interventions (CR, SE, SW, sealing with sealant materials, Hall Technique, or NRCC) vs Each other, placebo, or no treatment

Subjective evaluation of the treatments by participants · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

COE with blood/salivary (biomarker) analysis vs COE with vital rinsing (toluidine blue/tolonium chloride)

Outcome not reported · Apparently healthy adults not reporting symptoms of OPMD or OSCC, attending an organised screening or surveillance programme, or screened…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Visual or visual-tactile classification systems (any system: ICDAS, ERK, Nyvad, Downer, Lussi, UniViSS, or unspecified) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Diagnostic accuracy in previously restored teeth (secondary caries) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Visual or visual‐tactile examination to detect and inform the diagnosis of enamel caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies) · Previously restored teeth (secondary caries)
    Only one study (Kim 2017) intentionally included restored teeth in its sample; the pre-specified secondary-caries subgroup analysis could not be performed, no summary estimate reported.
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Electronic caries monitor (ECM) device (ECM II / ECM III / ECM IV) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Specificity · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or extracted teeth of…
1 finding from 1 review

Sealing using sealant materials vs Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE)

Lesion progression · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Cavitated lesions, primary dentition
    Lesion progression reported narratively: Dias 2018 1/27 sealed vs 1/21 SE at 24 months; Hesse 2014 0/17 sealed vs 0/17 SE at 18 months; not pooled and not GRADE-rated.
    2 studies
    GRADE not reported

Electrical conductance devices (electronic caries monitor (ECM) and/or CarieScan Pro), used as an adjunct to clinical oral examination vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic odds ratio (overall test accuracy) · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or extracted teeth of…
1 finding from 1 review

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Stepwise carious tissue removal (SW)

Failure of therapy · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) probably leads to higher failure of therapy compared with stepwise carious tissue removal (SW) (moderate certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

COE with blood/salivary (biomarker) analysis vs Conventional oral examination (COE) alone

Outcome not reported · Apparently healthy adults not reporting symptoms of OPMD or OSCC, attending an organised screening or surveillance programme, or screened…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)

Efficiency, costs or cost-effectiveness · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…
1 finding from 1 review

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) vs Digital radiographs (direct within-person / paired comparison); reference standard: histology

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…
2 findings from 1 review

Electrical conductance devices (electronic caries monitor (ECM) and/or CarieScan Pro), used as an adjunct to clinical oral examination vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual examination (with or without radiographs)

Outcome not reported · Teeth with previously applied restorations (secondary caries) or pit and fissure sealants; target condition = non-cavitated enamel caries.

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Electrical conductance for the detection of dental caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    No eligible studies. 'No included studies reported inclusion criteria of previously applied restorations or pit and fissure sealants' (a planned subgroup).
    0 studies
    No studies found

COE with light-based detection (e.g. ViziLite Plus, Microlux/DL, VELscope, Identafi 3000) vs Reference standard: examination and clinical evaluation by a physician/clinician with specialist knowledge or training (long-term follow-up accepted for those screened negative)

Outcome not reported · Apparently healthy adults not reporting symptoms of OPMD or OSCC, attending an organised screening or surveillance programme, or screened…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Rubber dam vs Isolite system

Costs: operation/chair time · Dental patients undergoing direct or indirect restorative treatment (no age or gender restriction)

It is very uncertain whether rubber dam isolation changes costs: operation/chair time compared with isolite system (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) vs Digital radiographs (direct within-person / paired comparison); reference standard: histology

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…
2 findings from 1 review