Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

821 questions · 993 findings · 80 reviews · Dental caries

No studies found 60 · 6%GRADE not reported 749 · 75.4%Very low 109 · 11%Low 41 · 4.1%Moderate 34 · 3.4%High 0 · 0%

Partial pulpotomy vs Full (complete) pulpotomy

Oral health-related quality of life · Mature permanent (molar) teeth with deep caries and symptoms indicative of irreversible pulpitis (spontaneous pain)

No included study reported oral health-related quality of life (a planned outcome), so no evidence is available.

1 finding from 1 review

Caries experience vs Adolescents without dental caries

Negative oral-health impact on daily performance (OIDP or Child-OIDP) · Adolescents (10-19 years)

For experience (history) of dental caries, adolescents had a significantly worse oral-health impact: PR 1.72 (95% CI 1.23 to 2.43) from 6 studies (I2=97%); ungraded, and not statistically different from the presence subgroup (p=0.19).

1 finding from 1 review
  • Impact of dental caries on the quality of life of adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomes
    Cross-sectional (concurrent exposure and outcome); oral impacts recalled over the prior 6 months · School-based (17/20 studies), plus household and secondary-data surveys; low-, middle- and high-income countries (Brazil, Thailand, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Zambia, Iran, Serbia, Nepal, India, South Africa, China) · Caries-definition subgroup: experience of dental caries
    PR 1.72 [1.23, 2.43]
    6 studies
    GRADE not reported

Dietary advice on how to achieve a healthy diet for infants (tailored advice focused on a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol intake) vs usual care

Mother self-reported oral health behaviours · For interventions, pregnant women, mothers or other caregivers of infants in the first year of life; for outcomes, children up to 6 years…
1 finding from 1 review

Dietary advice on how to achieve a healthy diet for infants (tailored advice focused on a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol intake) vs usual care

Child oral health behaviours · For interventions, pregnant women, mothers or other caregivers of infants in the first year of life; for outcomes, children up to 6 years…
1 finding from 1 review

Advice about a healthy diet (including breastfeeding promotion and sugar avoidance) and feeding practices (e.g. relating to bottle-feeding and sleep) for infants and young children vs usual care

Mother self-reported oral health behaviours and attitudes · For interventions, pregnant women, mothers or other caregivers of infants in the first year of life; for outcomes, children up to 6 years…
1 finding from 1 review

Advice about a healthy diet (including breastfeeding promotion and sugar avoidance) and feeding practices (e.g. relating to bottle-feeding and sleep) for infants and young children vs usual care

Child oral health behaviours · For interventions, pregnant women, mothers or other caregivers of infants in the first year of life; for outcomes, children up to 6 years…
1 finding from 1 review

Gum chewing (sugar-free) vs Within-subject before/after comparison of soft gum vs hard gum (no no-gum control)

Oral mucosal moisture · Elderly (>60 years) and medically compromised adults with xerostomia / dry mouth

One small study found that chewing hard (but not soft) gum increased oral mucosal moisture.

1 finding from 1 review

Malocclusion vs No malocclusion

Poor oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) · Adolescents (10-19 years)

Malocclusions probably have a negative effect on OHRQoL in adolescents, after adjustment for confounders (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Machine-learning algorithms for dental caries detection vs Different machine-learning algorithms for caries prediction

Caries detection accuracy on intraoral images · Dental images of human beings

The review reported 93.3% accuracy for caries detection on intraoral images in Kühnisch et al. (Ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Gum chewing (sugar-free) vs Pooled controls: no gum, placebo/control gum, probiotic, or fluoride varnish

Streptococcus mutans load in the oral cavity (saliva and/or dental plaque) · Adults and children (general population)

In a sensitivity analysis assuming a 0.95 baseline-to-endpoint correlation for the sugar-free gum arm, the effect remained significant (SMD -0.55, 95% CI -0.80 to -0.30; 13 trials, I2 73%); certainty not formally graded.

2 findings from 1 review

Xylitol-only sugar-free chewing gum vs Pooled controls: no gum, placebo/control gum, probiotic, or fluoride varnish

Streptococcus mutans load in the oral cavity (saliva and/or dental plaque) · Adults and children (general population)

Xylitol-only sugar-free gum significantly reduced Streptococcus mutans load versus pooled controls (SMD -0.46, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.28; 12 trials, I2 43%); certainty not formally graded.

1 finding from 1 review

Gastroesophageal or laryngopharyngeal reflux (GERD/LPR) vs Healthy controls

Salivary function impairment (buffering capacity, flow rate, oral pH) · Adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)

Reflux is associated with impaired salivary function (notably reduced buffering capacity) as a proposed pathophysiological mechanism, based on several ungraded studies.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Laryngopharyngeal reflux, gastroesophageal reflux and dental disorders: A systematic review. 2020 All outcomes
    Adult patients in gastroenterology, ENT and dental clinical settings
    Mixed/controversial salivary findings: reduced salivary buffering capacity supported in three studies (Correa, Holbrook, Filipi) with low oral pH and reduced flow as additional factors in GERD patients, but Meurman and Schroeder found no significant salivary abnormalities; no pooled estimate.
    6 studies
    GRADE not reported

Gastroesophageal or laryngopharyngeal reflux (GERD/LPR) vs Healthy controls

Oral/pharyngeal microbiota modifications · Adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)

No eligible studies investigated reflux-related modifications of the oral or pharyngeal microbiota; this is an evidence gap identified by the review.

1 finding from 1 review

Surgically induced or chronic acid gastroesophageal reflux (experimental) vs Non-reflux control animals

Dental erosion, alveolar bone destruction and oral/pharyngeal lesions · Rat models with surgically induced or chronic acid gastroesophageal reflux

In experimental rat models, induced gastroesophageal reflux caused dental erosion, alveolar bone destruction and oral lesions compared with controls, supporting biological plausibility; evidence is ungraded animal research.

1 finding from 1 review

GERD/NERD vs Healthy individuals without reflux (controls)

Oral mucosa inflammation (gingivitis, periodontitis, mucosal lesions) · Adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)

The association between reflux and oral mucosa inflammation (gingivitis/periodontitis) is inconsistent across five studies and remains ungraded.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride mouthrinse (any fluoride agent, concentration, volume, frequency or technique; swished and expectorated, not swallowed) vs placebo or no treatment

Mucosal irritation / oral soft tissue allergic reaction (signs of sensitivity) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less
1 finding from 1 review

Selective or stepwise carious tissue removal vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Temporal change in the proportion of dentists utilizing SE/SW · Dentists managing deep carious lesions in permanent vital teeth

The proportion of dentists choosing selective or stepwise removal rose significantly over time, by about 1.6% per calendar year (meta-regression, p<0.05), a trend the authors described as borderline (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride gel (topically applied; operator- or self-applied; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Mucosal irritation / oral soft tissue allergic reaction (signs of sensitivity) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Vitamin D vs placebo or control

Femoral neck bone mineral density (FN-BMD) · Older or community-dwelling adults

Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Bone mineral density in femoral neck, Community-dwelling adults: WMD 1.10 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.90), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review