Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,410 questions · 8,901 findings · 1,091 reviews

No studies found 1,687 · 19%GRADE not reported 1,469 · 16.5%Very low 1,969 · 22.1%Low 2,060 · 23.1%Moderate 1,302 · 14.6%High 414 · 4.7%

Ranked among the 5,000 newest matching findings; add words or filters to narrow the search.

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 · Samples with a low (<15%) prevalence of caries into dentine (d3/D3); 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 studies reported the inclusion of a low prevalence (0% to 14%) of d3/D3 of tooth surfaces'; all included studies reported d3/D3 prevalence of 15% or above, so the planned low-prevalence…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Mouth self-examination (MSE) 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)

Sensitivity for detection of oral cavity cancer/OPMD · Apparently healthy adults not reporting symptoms of OPMD or OSCC, attending an organised screening or surveillance programme, or screened…
1 finding from 1 review

Visual examination (VE) 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)

Sensitivity for detection of oral cavity cancer/OPMD · Apparently healthy adults not reporting symptoms of OPMD or OSCC, attending an organised screening or surveillance programme, or screened…
1 finding from 1 review

AG genotype of ENAM rs1264848 vs AA genotype of ENAM rs1264848

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between AG genotype vs AA genotype of ENAM rs1264848 and dental caries susceptibility (AG vs AA model: OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.88-1.65); certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

TT genotype of AMELX rs6639060 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs6639060

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC genotype of AMELX rs6639060 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC model: OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.43-2.51) in the Age group: Adults subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

CT genotype of AMELX rs946252 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs946252

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between CT genotype vs CC genotype of AMELX rs946252 and dental caries susceptibility (CT vs CC model: OR 2.80, 95% CI 0.93-8.43) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

GG genotype of LTF rs1126478 vs AA + AG genotype of LTF rs1126478

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between GG genotype vs AA + AG genotype of LTF rs1126478 and dental caries susceptibility (GG vs AA + AG model: OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80-1.13) in the Age group: Children subgroup; certainty not graded.

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

CT genotype of AMELX rs17878486 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs17878486

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

The CT genotype of AMELX rs17878486 was associated with increased dental caries risk (CT vs CC model: OR 5.11, 95% CI 1.33-19.72) in the Ethnicity: Mixed subgroup; certainty not graded.

9 findings from 1 review
Show 6 more findings

GG genotype of ENAM rs3796704 vs AA + AG genotype of ENAM rs3796704

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between GG genotype vs AA + AG genotype of ENAM rs3796704 and dental caries susceptibility (GG vs AA + AG model: OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.66-1.68) in the Control group: Low caries subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

CT + TT genotype (T-allele carriers) of AMELX rs946252 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs946252

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between CT + TT genotype (T-allele carriers) vs CC genotype of AMELX rs946252 and dental caries susceptibility (CT + TT vs CC model: OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.67-4.01) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

T allele of AMELX rs946252 vs C allele of AMELX rs946252

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between T allele vs C allele of AMELX rs946252 and dental caries susceptibility (T vs C model: OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.53-1.86) in the Ethnicity: Mixed subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

G allele of ENAM rs3796704 vs A allele of ENAM rs3796704

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between G allele vs A allele of ENAM rs3796704 and dental caries susceptibility (G vs A model: OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.57-2.15) in the Ethnicity: Mixed subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

G allele of ENAM rs1264848 vs A allele of ENAM rs1264848

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between G allele vs A allele of ENAM rs1264848 and dental caries susceptibility (G vs A model: OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65-1.32); certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

AG genotype of ENAM rs3796704 vs AA genotype of ENAM rs3796704

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between AG genotype vs AA genotype of ENAM rs3796704 and dental caries susceptibility (AG vs AA model: OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.07-1.74) in the Age group: Children subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

CT + TT genotype (T-allele carriers) of AMELX rs17878486 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs17878486

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

The CT + TT genotype (T-allele carriers) of AMELX rs17878486 was associated with increased dental caries risk (CT + TT vs CC model: OR 5.72, 95% CI 2.83-11.59) after excluding the outlier study (Ergoz 2014); certainty not graded.

9 findings from 1 review
Show 6 more findings

AG genotype of LTF rs1126478 vs AA genotype of LTF rs1126478

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between AG genotype vs AA genotype of LTF rs1126478 and dental caries susceptibility (AG vs AA model: OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.80-1.43) in the Ethnicity: Asian subgroup; certainty not graded.

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

CT + TT genotype (T-allele carriers) of AMELX rs6639060 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs6639060

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between CT + TT genotype (T-allele carriers) vs CC genotype of AMELX rs6639060 and dental caries susceptibility (CT + TT vs CC model: OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.56-2.29) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

TT genotype of AMELX rs946252 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs946252

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC genotype of AMELX rs946252 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC model: OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.61-3.92) in the Age group: Children subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

GG genotype of ENAM rs3796704 vs AA genotype of ENAM rs3796704

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between GG genotype vs AA genotype of ENAM rs3796704 and dental caries susceptibility (GG vs AA model: OR 1.86, 95% CI 0.96-3.62); certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

AG + GG genotype (G-allele carriers) of LTF rs1126478 vs AA genotype of LTF rs1126478

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between AG + GG genotype (G-allele carriers) vs AA genotype of LTF rs1126478 and dental caries susceptibility (AG + GG vs AA model: OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81-1.23) in the Age group: Children subgroup; certainty not graded.

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings