evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

2,509 questions · 2,666 findings · 288 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 743 · 27.9%GRADE not reported 327 · 12.3%Very low 775 · 29.1%Low 484 · 18.2%Moderate 279 · 10.5%High 58 · 2.2%

Any surgical or non-surgical technique or material used for the treatment of post-extraction bleeding vs Placebo, no treatment, or another active antifungal intervention

Adverse events · People of any age and either gender with post-extraction bleeding, regardless of type of teeth (anterior or posterior, mandibular or…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Any surgical or non-surgical technique or material used for the treatment of post-extraction bleeding vs Placebo, no treatment, or another active antifungal intervention

Costs: direct cost of treatment · People of any age and either gender with post-extraction bleeding, regardless of type of teeth (anterior or posterior, mandibular or…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Root canal medications and canal filling, splinting, extraction of teeth, or surgical removal of any relevant pathology vs Each other, placebo, or no treatment

Outcome not reported · Patients with single and multiple permanent teeth with evidence of any type of external root resorption irrespective of its aetiology,…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Interventions for the management of external root resorption 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Any follow-up period
    None of the studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria and therefore no data analysis was conducted. (Main results: no RCTs that met the inclusion criteria were identified; one ongoing study, NCT00423956, potentially…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Endodontic therapy performed with one type of magnification device (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs Endodontic therapy performed with a different type of magnification device

Repair of root perforations · Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Magnification devices for endodontic therapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

Endodontic therapy performed with one type of magnification device (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs Endodontic therapy performed with a different type of magnification device

Total time required to complete the clinical procedure · Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Magnification devices for endodontic therapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No included study assessed procedure time. In the excluded trial Taschieri 2008, based on the operators' experience, completing the surgical procedure took on average four to five minutes longer for the endoscope than…
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

Endodontic therapy performed with one type of magnification device (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs Endodontic therapy performed with a different type of magnification device

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Magnification devices for endodontic therapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    >=1 year after treatment
    None of the studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria; the only trial comparing three magnification devices (Taschieri 2008) was excluded, so no data analysis was conducted.
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

Endodontic therapy performed with one type of magnification device (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs Endodontic therapy performed with a different type of magnification device

Quality of visualisation of root canal anatomy and morphology · Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Magnification devices for endodontic therapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

Endodontic therapy performed with one type of magnification device (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs Endodontic therapy performed with a different type of magnification device

Removal of broken (fractured) instruments from the root canal · Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Magnification devices for endodontic therapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

Non-surgical orthodontic treatment (any: facemask, chin cup, tandem traction bow, mandibular headgear, ORTA, reverse Twin Block, Reverse Forsus) vs no treatment

Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Non-surgical orthodontic treatment (any: facemask, chin cup, tandem… probably leads to higher overjet compared with no treatment (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non-surgical orthodontic treatment (any: facemask, chin cup, tandem traction bow, mandibular headgear, ORTA, reverse Twin Block, Reverse Forsus) vs no treatment

Wits appraisal · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Non-surgical orthodontic treatment (any: facemask, chin cup, tandem… led to higher wits appraisal compared with no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Non-surgical orthodontic treatment (any: facemask, chin cup, tandem traction bow, mandibular headgear, ORTA, reverse Twin Block, Reverse Forsus) vs no treatment

ANB · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Non-surgical orthodontic treatment (any: facemask, chin cup, tandem… probably leads to higher ANB compared with no treatment (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic treatment with appliances inducing stable, permanent orthodontic tooth movement (splints worn 8 to 12 weeks and surgical interventions excluded) vs Control: no treatment, placebo, or reassurance

Patient quality of life · Adults aged 18 years or older with clinically diagnosed TMD (exhibiting two or more of the listed signs and/or symptoms)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic treatment with appliances inducing stable, permanent orthodontic tooth movement (splints worn 8 to 12 weeks and surgical interventions excluded) vs Control: no treatment, placebo, or reassurance

Adverse effects on oral health · Adults aged 18 years or older with clinically diagnosed TMD (exhibiting two or more of the listed signs and/or symptoms)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic treatment with appliances inducing stable, permanent orthodontic tooth movement (splints worn 8 to 12 weeks and surgical interventions excluded) vs Control: no treatment, placebo, or reassurance

Limitation of movement · Adults aged 18 years or older with clinically diagnosed TMD (exhibiting two or more of the listed signs and/or symptoms)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic treatment with appliances inducing stable, permanent orthodontic tooth movement (splints worn 8 to 12 weeks and surgical interventions excluded) vs Control: no treatment, placebo, or reassurance

Development of TMD (onset/incidence of signs and symptoms) · People without TMD at baseline undergoing orthodontic treatment (TMD clinically absent at baseline); no age restriction provided follow-up…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic treatment with appliances inducing stable, permanent orthodontic tooth movement (splints worn 8 to 12 weeks and surgical interventions excluded) vs Control: no treatment, placebo, or reassurance

Overall symptoms, pain and headache (relief from symptoms assessed by global measures) · Adults aged 18 years or older with clinically diagnosed TMD (exhibiting two or more of the listed signs and/or symptoms)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Endodontic therapy (surgical or non-surgical) performed with the aid of one or more magnification devices (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs The same endodontic therapy performed without magnification devices (without visual enhancers)

Removal of broken (fractured) instruments from the root canal · Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Magnification devices for endodontic therapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

Endodontic therapy (surgical or non-surgical) performed with the aid of one or more magnification devices (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs The same endodontic therapy performed without magnification devices (without visual enhancers)

Total time required to complete the clinical procedure · Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Magnification devices for endodontic therapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No included study assessed procedure time; such outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

Endodontic therapy (surgical or non-surgical) performed with the aid of one or more magnification devices (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs The same endodontic therapy performed without magnification devices (without visual enhancers)

Repair of root perforations · Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Magnification devices for endodontic therapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

Endodontic therapy (surgical or non-surgical) performed with the aid of one or more magnification devices (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs The same endodontic therapy performed without magnification devices (without visual enhancers)

Quality of visualisation of root canal anatomy and morphology · Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Magnification devices for endodontic therapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.
    Studies not reported
    No studies found