Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,695 questions · 4,979 findings · 433 reviews

No studies found 998 · 20%GRADE not reported 1,140 · 22.9%Very low 1,024 · 20.6%Low 1,029 · 20.7%Moderate 636 · 12.8%High 152 · 3.1%

Intranasal steroid spray vs no treatment

Presence/persistence of OME · children aged 6 months to 12 years with otitis media with effusion (OME)

It is very uncertain whether topical (intranasal) steroids changes presence/persistence of OME (short‐term); assumed ICC = 0.5 compared with no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

Proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of dental care) · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Criteria-based screening (dentist refers using pre-established criteria) vs Traditional screening

Dental attendance · primary or secondary school pupils

It is very uncertain whether criteria-based screening (dentist refers using pre-established… changes dental attendance compared with traditional screening (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

Developmental defects of enamel measured by any validated index · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

Trauma to permanent incisor teeth · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India
1 finding from 1 review
  • Milsom 2006 reported the prevalence of trauma to the permanent incisor teeth as a dichotomous outcome (reduction from baseline yes/no); we were unable to include this data in a meta-analysis.
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Referral to a specific dental treatment facility vs Generic advice letter to see a dentist

Dental attendance · School children, primary school in Saudi Arabia

It is very uncertain whether referral to a specific dental treatment facility changes dental attendance (number of dental visits) compared with generic advice letter to see a dentist (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

Dental attendance · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India
1 finding from 1 review
  • School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
    3 to 4 months
    Data not pooled; 6281 participants (4 RCTs); Very low. There was substantial heterogeneity, in part due to study design (3 cluster-RCTs and 1 individually randomised trial). We are unable to draw conclusions about this…
    4 studies · 6281 participants
    Very low

Referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) of self-regulation vs Standard referral letter

Proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of dental care) · School children, primary schools in the USA

It is very uncertain whether referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) of… changes proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of… compared with standard referral letter (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Criteria-based screening with specific (personalised) referral letter vs Criteria-based screening with non-specific referral letter

Dental attendance at orthodontist · School children, secondary school in the UK (aged 11 to 13 years)

It is very uncertain whether criteria-based screening with specific (personalised) referral letter changes dental attendance at orthodontist compared with criteria-based screening with non-specific referral letter (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) plus dental information guide (DIG) vs Referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) alone

Proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of dental care) · School children, primary schools in the USA

It is very uncertain whether referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) plus dental… changes proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of… compared with referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

Malocclusion or orthodontic treatment needs measured by any validated index · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Antiplatelet drug vs control

Recurrent ischaemic or unknown stroke during treatment period · acute ischaemic stroke

It is very uncertain whether antiplatelet drug changes recurrent ischaemic/unknown stroke during treatment period compared with control (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review