Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

558 questions · 704 findings · 64 reviews · Dental caries

No studies found 91 · 12.9%GRADE not reported 441 · 62.6%Very low 76 · 10.8%Low 73 · 10.4%Moderate 21 · 3%High 2 · 0.3%

Xylitol tablets (200 to 600 mg/day) via slow-release pacifier/dummy vs Control (sorbitol) tablets

Number of infants with a caries increment (dmfs) · Infants (primary teeth)

It is very uncertain whether xylitol tablets (200 to 600 mg/day) via slow-release pacifier/dummy changes number of infants with a caries increment (dmfs) compared with control (sorbitol) tablets (very low certainty).

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

Caries increment in primary/deciduous teeth: decayed, (extraction indicated/missing) and filled teeth d(e/m)ft (prevented fraction) · Children with primary (deciduous) teeth (younger children)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Topical fluoride therapy (toothpaste, mouthrinse, gel or varnish; any fluoride agent/concentration; frequency at least once a year) vs placebo or no treatment

Caries increment on primary (deciduous) tooth surfaces (d(e/m)fs), prevented fraction · Children with primary (deciduous) teeth (younger children)
5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

Dental fillings (restorations) vs No treatment

Outcome not reported · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Probiotics vs placebo or control

Dental caries in children · Adolescents (12-18 years) without background systemic disease

In a subgroup analysis, probiotics reduced the number of caries in adolescents (MD -0.60, 95%CI -0.92 to -0.28; p-interaction=0.02); not GRADE-rated.

1 finding from 1 review

Learning disability (CLD) vs No learning disability (CNLD)

Early childhood caries experience (mean dmft) · Children aged 1-18 years

In primary teeth, meta-analysis found no evidence of a difference in caries experience (dmft/deft) between children with and without learning disabilities (SMD 0.41, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.96; 8 studies; certainty not graded).

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

Learning disability (CLD) vs No learning disability (CNLD)

Dental caries in permanent teeth · Children aged 1-18 years

Across all learning disabilities, meta-analysis found no evidence of a difference in permanent-tooth caries experience (DMFT) between children with and without learning disabilities (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.91 to 0.05; 16 studies; certainty not graded).

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

Learning disability (CLD) vs No learning disability (CNLD)

Unmet dental treatment need · Children aged 1-18 years

Narrative reports from 6 studies suggested greater unmet dental treatment need in children with learning disabilities (5 of 6 studies), but no quantitative data were available (certainty not graded).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) vs placebo or no treatment

Filled primary surfaces at 3 years · Pregnant women (for preventing dental caries in the primary teeth of their children)

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) showed no clear difference in filled primary surfaces at 5 years compared with placebo or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) vs placebo or no treatment

Fluorosis (maxillary teeth) at 5 years · Pregnant women (for preventing dental caries in the primary teeth of their children)

It is very uncertain whether fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) changes fluorosis (maxillary teeth) at 5 years compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) vs placebo or no treatment

Caries in primary teeth: dmft (3 years) · Pregnant women (for preventing dental caries in the primary teeth of their children)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) vs placebo or no treatment

Fluorosis (mandibular teeth) at 5 years · Pregnant women (for preventing dental caries in the primary teeth of their children)

It is very uncertain whether fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) changes fluorosis (mandibular teeth) at 5 years compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) vs placebo or no treatment

Decayed primary surfaces at 3 years · Pregnant women (for preventing dental caries in the primary teeth of their children)

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) showed no clear difference in decayed primary surfaces at 3 years compared with placebo or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) vs placebo or no treatment

Decayed or filled primary tooth surfaces at 3 years · Pregnant women (for preventing dental caries in the primary teeth of their children)

It is very uncertain whether fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) changes decayed or filled primary tooth surfaces at 3 years compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) vs placebo or no treatment

Decayed or filled primary tooth surfaces at 5 years · Pregnant women (for preventing dental caries in the primary teeth of their children)

It is very uncertain whether fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) changes decayed or filled primary tooth surfaces at 5 years compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Adhesive/polyurethane sealant patch vs No treatment (both arms received flossing plus fluoride toothpaste)

Caries (lesion) progression (radiographic) · Dentate children and adults with non-cavitated proximal caries lesions extending into enamel or dentine (not pulp) in primary or permanent…

Adhesive/polyurethane sealant patch showed no clear difference in caries (lesion) progression (radiographic) compared with no treatment (both arms received flossing plus fluoride toothpaste); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Micro-invasive treatment (proximal sealing or resin infiltration): resin sealant, glass ionomer sealant, polyurethane/adhesive patch, or resin infiltration vs Non-invasive / control treatment

Caries (lesion) progression (radiographic) · Dentate children and adults with non-cavitated proximal caries lesions extending into enamel or dentine (not pulp) in primary or permanent…

Micro-invasive treatment (proximal sealing or resin infiltration):… probably leads to lower caries (lesion) progression measured by pairwise reading of… compared with non-invasive measures (e.g. fluoride varnish, flossing/oral hygiene… (moderate certainty).

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding