evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,587 questions · 5,761 findings · 495 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 1,011 · 17.5%GRADE not reported 1,797 · 31.2%Very low 1,100 · 19.1%Low 1,052 · 18.3%Moderate 649 · 11.3%High 152 · 2.6%

Ranked among the 5,000 newest matching findings; add words or filters to narrow the search.

Intraglandular botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) injection vs No BoNT (placebo or pre-treatment baseline)

Salivary osmolality (hydration level) · Patients with drooling (sialorrhea) due to neurological disease

No included study reported salivary osmolality; this pre-planned outcome remains unassessed (no studies).

1 finding from 1 review

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Patient satisfaction with actual care received (1-7 scale) · Dentate adults (aged 18 years and older) receiving dental check-ups in UK general dental practices (regular attenders)

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in patient satisfaction with actual care received (1-7 scale) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Intraglandular botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) injection vs No BoNT (placebo or pre-treatment baseline)

Salivary S. mutans level · Patients with drooling (sialorrhea) due to neurological disease

BoNT injections were not associated with significant changes in salivary S. mutans counts across three studies (ungraded; no effect estimate reported).

1 finding from 1 review
  • Oral health effects of botulinum toxin treatment for drooling: a systematic review. 2020 All outcomes
    Before vs after BoNT injection · Neurological-disease populations with drooling (e.g., cerebral palsy, Parkinson disease, adults with sialorrhea); specialist clinical care
    The RCT by Wu et al. reported no statistically significant changes in S. mutans CFU counts (p-values only). The studies of Tiigimae-Saar did not find statistically significant differences in S. mutans CFU counts either.
    3 studies
    GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 12-month recall

Total time (examination plus treatment) (minutes) · Regular-attending primary-care dental patients aged 3, 16 or 18 years at entry (aged up to 20; low caries risk)

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in total time (examination plus treatment) (minutes) compared with clinical examination with 12-month recall; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Periodontal disease: gingival bleeding (percentage of sites) · Dentate adults (aged 18 years and older) receiving dental check-ups in UK general dental practices (regular attenders)

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in periodontal disease: gingival bleeding (percentage of sites) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Dental caries · Dentate adults (aged 18 years and older) receiving dental check-ups in UK general dental practices (regular attenders)

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in dental caries: number of tooth surfaces with any caries (ICDAS 1-6) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Cost (patient perspective): total cost per patient (GBP) · Dentate adults (aged 18 years and older) receiving dental check-ups in UK general dental practices (regular attenders)

Clinical examination with 24-month recall led to lower cost (patient perspective): total cost per patient (GBP) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 12-month recall

Periodontal disease · Regular-attending primary-care dental patients aged 3, 16 or 18 years at entry (aged up to 20; low caries risk)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Dental caries: prevalence of root caries · Dentate adults (aged 18 years and older) receiving dental check-ups in UK general dental practices (regular attenders)

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in dental caries: prevalence of root caries compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Periodontal disease: gingival bleeding (percentage of sites) · Dentate adults (aged 18 years and older) receiving dental check-ups in UK general dental practices (regular attenders)

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in periodontal disease: gingival bleeding (percentage of sites) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Dental caries: prevalence of moderate to extensive caries (ICDAS 3-6) · Dentate adults (aged 18 years and older) receiving dental check-ups in UK general dental practices (regular attenders)

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in dental caries: prevalence of moderate to extensive caries (ICDAS 3-6) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review