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 ENAM rs3796703 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC model: OR 5.22, 95% CI 0.25-108.96) in the Ethnicity: Asian subgroup; certainty not graded.
3 findings from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 1.67 (95% CI 0.44 to 6.34).
1 finding from 1 review
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 ENAM rs3796703 and dental caries susceptibility (CT + TT vs CC model: OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.23-3.63); certainty not graded.
3 findings from 1 review
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 + CT genotype of AMELX rs6639060 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC + CT model: OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.42-2.39) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.
3 findings from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 1.03 (95% CI 0.28 to 3.75).
1 finding from 1 review
OR 1.03 [0.28, 3.75]
1 study
GRADE not reported
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 1.03 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.33).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 0.99 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.23).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 0.98 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.10).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 5.22 (95% CI 0.25 to 108.96).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 0.92 (95% CI 0.24 to 3.58).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 0.95 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.13).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 2.90 (95% CI 0.92 to 9.12).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 1.83 (95% CI 0.47 to 7.06).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 0.89 (95% CI 0.23 to 3.48).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 0.59 (95% CI 0.15 to 2.31).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)
The pooled odds ratio was 1.00 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.25).
1 finding from 1 review
Prevalence and severity of oral and TMJ diseases/conditions (periodontal status and dental caries) · Children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA)
Some studies suggested greater JIA disease activity/severity (and certain medications) was associated with worse periodontal and caries outcomes, but small samples meant no solid conclusion could be drawn (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Periodontal disease and serum IL-1β IL-6 and cortisol · Patients with aggressive or chronic periodontitis at a university periodontology department
No correlation was reported between immunological markers cortisol and registered stress values; untreated aggressive periodontitis was accompanied by pessimistic attitude and elevated serum IL-6.
1 finding from 1 review
GCF elastase activity and non-surgical periodontal treatment outcome (salivary cortisol, ICTP measured; no effect reported) · Adults with periodontitis needing non-surgical periodontal treatment
In one 6-month longitudinal study, patients under psychosocial stress had higher gingival crevicular fluid elastase and poorer outcomes after non-surgical periodontal therapy; not pooled (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Gingival inflammation and GCF IL-1β IL-6 and IL-8 · Adults with gingivitis or periodontitis from a private periodontics practice
Perceived stress was associated with IL-1β IL-6 and IL-8 levels in gingival crevicular fluid.
1 finding from 1 review