Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

3,429 questions · 3,558 findings · 436 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 660 · 18.5%GRADE not reported 375 · 10.5%Very low 727 · 20.4%Low 887 · 24.9%Moderate 709 · 19.9%High 200 · 5.6%

Non‐alcohol commercials vs alcohol commercials

Loss of revenue from alcohol industry ‐ not measured · general population

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Restricting or banning alcohol advertising to reduce alcohol consumption in adults and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Non‐alcohol commercials vs alcohol commercials

Loss of advertising revenue ‐ not measured · general population

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Restricting or banning alcohol advertising to reduce alcohol consumption in adults and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Alcohol ban vs no ban

Alcohol consumption: % change in beer consumption · general population

1 finding from 1 review

Restricting or banning alcohol advertising to reduce alcohol consumption in adults and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 participants
Very low

Alcohol ban vs no ban

Reduction in rate of reported risk behaviour ‐ not reported · general population

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Restricting or banning alcohol advertising to reduce alcohol consumption in adults and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Oral cancer mortality (disease-specific) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers showed no clear difference in oral cancer mortality (disease-specific) compared with no screening (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
15-year follow-up
RR 0.88 [0.69, 1.12]
1 study · 191873 participants
Low
Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
15-year follow-up · High-risk individuals (tobacco and/or alcohol users)
RR 0.76 [0.60, 0.97]
1 study
GRADE not reported

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Costs · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
9 years (three cycles)
The costs associated with the screening programme were reported after three cycles (nine years) (Subramanian 2009) (Additional Table 8). The benefit produced by a screen was 269.31 life-years saved per 100,000 for all…
1 study
GRADE not reported

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Harms of screening (false-positive/false-negative outcomes) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
15-year follow-up
No harms were reported.
0 studies
No studies found

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Oral cancer incidence · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers showed no clear difference in oral cancer incidence compared with no screening; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
15-year follow-up
RR 1.14 [0.91, 1.44]
1 study · 191873 participants
GRADE not reported
Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
15-year follow-up · High-risk individuals (tobacco and/or alcohol users)
RR 0.97 [0.79, 1.19]
1 study
GRADE not reported

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Stage at diagnosis (early-stage detection) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers led to lower stage at diagnosis (early-stage detection) compared with no screening; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
15-year follow-up
RR 0.81 [0.70, 0.93]
1 study · 523 participants
GRADE not reported
Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
15-year follow-up · High-risk individuals (tobacco and/or alcohol users)
RR 0.82 [0.71, 0.95]
1 study · 486 participants
GRADE not reported

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Quality of life · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
15-year follow-up
Data on quality of life were not reported.
0 studies
No studies found

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Test performance (sensitivity and specificity) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
15-year follow-up
Across the four cycles (15 years), the reported sensitivity of the visual examination in detecting oral cancer was 67.4% (188/279). No information on the specificity or the positive predictive value of the programme…
1 study
GRADE not reported

Toluidine blue (visual staining) vs No screening

Outcome not reported · Planned population: general population or high-risk / opportunistic screening groups (no eligible study)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
There was no evidence to support the use of adjunctive technologies like toluidine blue, brush biopsy or fluorescence imaging as a screening tool to reduce oral cancer mortality; no eligible randomised controlled trial…
0 studies
No studies found

Brush biopsy (oral cytology) vs No screening

Outcome not reported · Planned population: general population or high-risk / opportunistic screening groups (no eligible study)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
There was no evidence to support the use of adjunctive technologies like toluidine blue, brush biopsy or fluorescence imaging as a screening tool to reduce oral cancer mortality; no eligible randomised controlled trial…
0 studies
No studies found

Fluorescence imaging / light-based techniques vs No screening

Outcome not reported · Planned population: general population or high-risk / opportunistic screening groups (no eligible study)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
There was no evidence to support the use of adjunctive technologies like toluidine blue, brush biopsy or fluorescence imaging as a screening tool to reduce oral cancer mortality; no eligible randomised controlled trial…
0 studies
No studies found

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Survival (proportion alive after diagnosis) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
5-year survival
A significantly higher five-year survival rate was reported in the screened group (55.5%) compared to the control (43.4%) (P value = 0.003).
1 study · 523 participants
GRADE not reported

Sodium hypochlorite 1.3% with MTAD final rinse vs Sodium hypochlorite 1.3% with normal saline final rinse

Adverse effects · Patients aged 14 to 78 years with mature permanent teeth (fully formed roots), single or multi-rooted, with pulpal or periapical…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Irrigants for non‐surgical root canal treatment in mature permanent teeth 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found

Sodium hypochlorite 5.25% with EDTA 17% vs Sodium hypochlorite 1.3% with MTAD

Mean change in health-related quality of life or participant-expressed satisfaction with the procedure · Patients aged 14 to 78 years with mature permanent teeth (fully formed roots), single or multi-rooted, with pulpal or periapical…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Irrigants for non‐surgical root canal treatment in mature permanent teeth 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found

Sodium hypochlorite 5.25% with EDTA 17% vs Sodium hypochlorite 1.3% with MTAD

Adverse effects · Patients aged 14 to 78 years with mature permanent teeth (fully formed roots), single or multi-rooted, with pulpal or periapical…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Irrigants for non‐surgical root canal treatment in mature permanent teeth 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found

Sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 2.5% to 5.25% vs Sodium hypochlorite 1%

Change in periapical radiolucency (radiography or CBCT), up to 1 year after treatment · Patients aged 14 to 78 years with mature permanent teeth (fully formed roots), single or multi-rooted, with pulpal or periapical…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Irrigants for non‐surgical root canal treatment in mature permanent teeth 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found

Sodium hypochlorite 1.3% with MTAD final rinse vs Sodium hypochlorite 1.3% with normal saline final rinse

Proportion of participants with new or worsening signs/symptoms of inflammation requiring a revisit, up to 14 days after the procedure · Patients aged 14 to 78 years with mature permanent teeth (fully formed roots), single or multi-rooted, with pulpal or periapical…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Irrigants for non‐surgical root canal treatment in mature permanent teeth 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found