What do systematic reviews say?

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Type 2 diabetes (prevalent): OR 0.45 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.82), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

• Vitamin D and multiple health outcomes: umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational… 2014 All outcomes
  OR 0.45 [0.25, 0.82]
  9 studies · 11892 participants
  GRADE not reported

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for All cause mortality: HR 0.72 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.78), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

• Vitamin D and multiple health outcomes: umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational… 2014 All outcomes
  HR 0.72 [0.66, 0.78]
  18 studies · 77155 participants
  GRADE not reported

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Rectal cancer: OR 0.50 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.88), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

• Vitamin D and multiple health outcomes: umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational… 2014 All outcomes
  OR 0.50 [0.29, 0.88]
  9 studies · 2050 participants
  GRADE not reported

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

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).

• 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

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

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

• 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

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.

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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%

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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% vs Sodium hypochlorite 5.25% with hydrogen peroxide 3%

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

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