What do systematic reviews say?

Populations with low socioeconomic status (>=22.4% of the population with low SES) vs Populations with higher socioeconomic status (<22.4% of the population with low SES)

Populations with a higher proportion of people with low socioeconomic status had higher caries experience (pooled DMFT 15.99 vs 5.50), and meta-regression associated low SES with higher DMFT (about 10.35 more DMFT per unit; p=0.050); ungraded observational evidence.

• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Low SES (>=22.4% with low SES)
  MEAN 15.99 [14.35, 17.63]
  4 studies
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Unadjusted model
  Meta-regression coefficient 10.49365
  Studies not reported
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Overall
  MEAN 11.49 [7.50, 15.48]
  7 studies
  GRADE not reported

Populations with a lower proportion of university-educated people (<33.78% with university level) vs Populations with a higher proportion of university-educated people (>=33.78% with university level)

The proportion of university-educated people was not associated with caries experience (DMFT); pooled DMFT was similar across subgroups and the meta-regression was non-significant; ungraded observational evidence.

• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · High university (>=33.78%)
  MEAN 10.91 [7.95, 13.87]
  9 studies
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Low university (<33.78%)
  MEAN 10.62 [7.30, 13.93]
  9 studies
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Adjusted (Model 1)
  Meta-regression coefficient -4.132903
  Studies not reported
  GRADE not reported

Slow-release fluoride device (fluoride glass beads) vs placebo or usual care

It is very uncertain whether slow-release fluoride device (fluoride glass beads) changes increase in DMFS at 2 years compared with baseline compared with placebo or usual care (control) (very low certainty).

• Slow‐release fluoride devices for the control of dental decay 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 years
  MD -1.52 [-2.68, -0.36]
  1 study · 63 participants
  Very low

Slow-release fluoride device (fluoride glass beads) vs placebo or usual care

It is very uncertain whether slow-release fluoride device (fluoride glass beads) changes increase in DMFT at 2 years compared with baseline compared with placebo or usual care (control) (very low certainty).

• Slow‐release fluoride devices for the control of dental decay 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 years
  MD -0.72 [-1.23, -0.21]
  1 study · 63 participants
  Very low

Slow-release fluoride device (fluoride glass beads) vs placebo or usual care

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Slow‐release fluoride devices for the control of dental decay 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No evidence found
  0 studies
  No studies found

HDI (quantitative) vs Populations in countries with a higher Human Development Index (very high, HDI >=0.800)

Pooled caries experience (DMFT) was similar in very-high-HDI and high-HDI countries, and meta-regression found no significant association between national HDI and DMFT; ungraded observational evidence with very high heterogeneity.

• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Adjusted (Model 1)
  Meta-regression coefficient -42.94101
  Studies not reported
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Unadjusted model
  Meta-regression coefficient 20.17878
  Studies not reported
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Adjusted (Model 2)
  Meta-regression coefficient 6.901906
  Studies not reported
  GRADE not reported

Medium income vs High income

In United States, medium versus high income differed by 0.1 decayed teeth in mean number of decayed teeth.

• Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. 2018 All outcomes

  2003-2004 · United States · United States
  AD 0.1 [-0.1, 0.2]
  1 study · 4568 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. 2018 All outcomes

  2004-2006 · Australia · Australia
  AD 0.2 [0.1, 0.3]
  1 study · 5073 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. 2018 All outcomes

  2007-2009 · Canada · Canada
  AD 0.4 [0.2, 0.5]
  1 study · 3278 participants
  GRADE not reported

Low income vs High income

Across four countries, low versus high income differed by 15.77 percentage points in prevalence of fair/poor self-rated oral health (random-effects meta-analysis; I2=13.4%).

• Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. 2018 All outcomes

  2003-2009 · Australia; Canada; New Zealand; United States · Overall random-effects meta-analysis
  AD 15.77 [12.77, 18.77]
  4 studies · 14960 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. 2018 All outcomes

  2009 · New Zealand · New Zealand
  AD 18.77 [9.75, 27.79]
  1 study · 2041 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic status, oral health and dental disease in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. 2018 All outcomes

  2003-2004 · United States · United States
  AD 20.49 [13.04, 27.93]
  1 study · 4568 participants
  GRADE not reported

Slow-release fluoride device (fluoride glass beads) vs placebo or usual care

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Slow‐release fluoride devices for the control of dental decay 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No evidence found
  0 studies
  No studies found

Populations with a low level of schooling (>=33.60% of the population with low schooling) vs Populations with a higher level of schooling (<33.60% of the population with low schooling)

Population level of schooling was not significantly associated with caries experience (DMFT) in subgroup meta-analysis or meta-regression; ungraded observational evidence with very high heterogeneity.

• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Unadjusted model
  Meta-regression coefficient -2.301079
  Studies not reported
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Low schooling (>=33.60% with low schooling)
  MEAN 9.63 [4.38, 14.89]
  5 studies
  GRADE not reported
• Socioeconomic Factors and Caries in People between 19 and 60 Years of Age: An Update of a Systematic Review and… 2018 All outcomes

  Population/community-based studies of adults aged 19-60 years across multiple countries (studies published 1975-2016) · Overall
  MEAN 10.87 [7.53, 14.20]
  11 studies
  GRADE not reported

Slow-release fluoride device (fluoride glass beads) vs placebo or usual care

• Slow‐release fluoride devices for the control of dental decay 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 years
  132 (1 study); very low; Only 63/132 (47.7%) children who were still available at 2-year follow-up had the devices intact
  1 study · 132 participants
  Very low

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in caesarean section – emergency (moderate certainty).

• Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.91 [0.67, 1.23]
  Studies not reported
  Moderate

Intervention not reported

• Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  Moderate

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in caesarean section – for psychological reasons (low certainty).

• Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.82 [0.5, 1.36]
  Studies not reported
  Low

Intervention not reported

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes caesarean section – overall (very low certainty).

• Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.81 [0.56, 1.18]
  Studies not reported
  Very low

Intervention not reported

• Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  Low

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in caesarean section – scheduled (moderate certainty).

• Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.9 [0.74, 1.11]
  Studies not reported
  Moderate

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in caesarean section – urgent (moderate certainty).

• Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.88 [0.58, 1.33]
  Studies not reported
  Moderate

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found