evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

342 questions · 380 findings · 34 reviews · Oral Health

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 97 · 25.5%GRADE not reported 190 · 50%Very low 67 · 17.6%Low 23 · 6.1%Moderate 3 · 0.8%High 0 · 0%

Topical corticosteroids vs Another topical agent or placebo

Adverse effects of long‐term use of available topical agents · HIV‐infected adults (> 13 years of age, per CDC) with one or more painful intraoral aphthous ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Topical treatments for HIV‐related oral ulcers 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No studies were included in this review. A total of 233 abstracts were retrieved; 25 were selected as potentially eligible but all were excluded (10 reported systemic rather than topical treatment; 3 non‐RCTs; 6…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Topical corticosteroids vs Another topical agent or placebo

Incidence and recurrence after healing of ulcers · HIV‐infected adults (> 13 years of age, per CDC) with one or more painful intraoral aphthous ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Topical treatments for HIV‐related oral ulcers 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No studies were included in this review. A total of 233 abstracts were retrieved; 25 were selected as potentially eligible but all were excluded (10 reported systemic rather than topical treatment; 3 non‐RCTs; 6…
    0 studies
    No studies found

HAART regimen + topical treatment vs HAART alone

Duration to heal oral ulcerations after initiation of treatment · HIV‐infected adults (> 13 years of age, per CDC) with one or more painful intraoral aphthous ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Topical treatments for HIV‐related oral ulcers 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No studies were included in this review. A total of 233 abstracts were retrieved; 25 were selected as potentially eligible but all were excluded (10 reported systemic rather than topical treatment; 3 non‐RCTs; 6…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Topical thalidomide vs Another topical agent or placebo

Adverse effects of long‐term use of available topical agents · HIV‐infected adults (> 13 years of age, per CDC) with one or more painful intraoral aphthous ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Topical treatments for HIV‐related oral ulcers 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No studies were included in this review. A total of 233 abstracts were retrieved; 25 were selected as potentially eligible but all were excluded (10 reported systemic rather than topical treatment; 3 non‐RCTs; 6…
    0 studies
    No studies found

HAART regimen + topical treatment vs HAART alone

Patient‐reported pain intensity or pain relief (VAS, NRS or categorical scale) · HIV‐infected adults (> 13 years of age, per CDC) with one or more painful intraoral aphthous ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Topical treatments for HIV‐related oral ulcers 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No studies were included in this review. A total of 233 abstracts were retrieved; 25 were selected as potentially eligible but all were excluded (10 reported systemic rather than topical treatment; 3 non‐RCTs; 6…
    0 studies
    No studies found

HAART regimen + topical treatment vs HAART alone

Incidence and recurrence after healing of ulcers · HIV‐infected adults (> 13 years of age, per CDC) with one or more painful intraoral aphthous ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Topical treatments for HIV‐related oral ulcers 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No studies were included in this review. A total of 233 abstracts were retrieved; 25 were selected as potentially eligible but all were excluded (10 reported systemic rather than topical treatment; 3 non‐RCTs; 6…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Antiseptic mouthwash (e.g. chlorhexidine) vs Another topical agent or placebo

Adverse effects of long‐term use of available topical agents · HIV‐infected adults (> 13 years of age, per CDC) with one or more painful intraoral aphthous ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Topical treatments for HIV‐related oral ulcers 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No studies were included in this review. A total of 233 abstracts were retrieved; 25 were selected as potentially eligible but all were excluded (10 reported systemic rather than topical treatment; 3 non‐RCTs; 6…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Topical thalidomide vs Another topical agent or placebo

Healing of ulceration · HIV‐infected adults (> 13 years of age, per CDC) with one or more painful intraoral aphthous ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Topical treatments for HIV‐related oral ulcers 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No studies were included in this review. A total of 233 abstracts were retrieved; 25 were selected as potentially eligible but all were excluded (10 reported systemic rather than topical treatment; 3 non‐RCTs; 6…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Topical thalidomide vs Another topical agent or placebo

Duration to heal oral ulcerations after initiation of treatment · HIV‐infected adults (> 13 years of age, per CDC) with one or more painful intraoral aphthous ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Topical treatments for HIV‐related oral ulcers 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No studies were included in this review. A total of 233 abstracts were retrieved; 25 were selected as potentially eligible but all were excluded (10 reported systemic rather than topical treatment; 3 non‐RCTs; 6…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Mixed beam (neutron and photon) radiotherapy vs Conventional photon radiotherapy

Locoregional control · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…

Mixed beam (neutron and photon) radiotherapy showed no clear difference in locoregional control compared with conventional photon radiotherapy; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Altered fractionation radiotherapy (hyperfractionated and/or accelerated) vs Conventional (standard) fractionation radiotherapy

Locoregional control · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…

Hyperfractionated/accelerated radiotherapy led to lower locoregional control compared with conventional (standard) fractionation radiotherapy; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Accelerated radiotherapy with concomitant boost vs Conventional (standard) fractionation radiotherapy

Locoregional control · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…
1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic treatment with appliances inducing stable, permanent orthodontic tooth movement (splints worn 8 to 12 weeks and surgical interventions excluded) vs Control: no treatment, placebo, or reassurance

Patient quality of life · Adults aged 18 years or older with clinically diagnosed TMD (exhibiting two or more of the listed signs and/or symptoms)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic treatment with appliances inducing stable, permanent orthodontic tooth movement (splints worn 8 to 12 weeks and surgical interventions excluded) vs Control: no treatment, placebo, or reassurance

Adverse effects on oral health · Adults aged 18 years or older with clinically diagnosed TMD (exhibiting two or more of the listed signs and/or symptoms)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Low dose rate interstitial radiotherapy vs High dose rate interstitial radiotherapy

Locoregional control · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…

Low dose rate interstitial radiotherapy showed no clear difference in locoregional control compared with high dose rate interstitial radiotherapy; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Hyperfractionated/accelerated split-course radiotherapy vs Accelerated radiotherapy with concomitant boost

Total mortality · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…
1 finding from 1 review

Altered fractionation radiotherapy (hyperfractionated and/or accelerated) vs Conventional (standard) fractionation radiotherapy

Disease-free survival · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…

Altered fractionation radiotherapy (hyperfractionated and/or… showed no clear difference in disease free survival compared with conventional (standard) fractionation radiotherapy; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Neutron radiotherapy vs Conventional photon radiotherapy

Disease-free survival · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…

Neutron radiotherapy showed no clear difference in disease free survival compared with conventional photon radiotherapy; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Hyperfractionated radiotherapy vs Conventional (standard) fractionation radiotherapy

Locoregional control · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…

Hyperfractionated radiotherapy led to lower locoregional control compared with conventional (standard) fractionation radiotherapy; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Accelerated radiotherapy with concomitant boost vs Conventional (standard) fractionation radiotherapy

Total mortality · People with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (ICD-O C01-C06) or oropharynx (ICD-O C09-C10); head and neck cancer trials…

Accelerated radiotherapy with concomitant boost showed no clear difference in total mortality compared with conventional (standard) fractionation radiotherapy; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review