Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,534 questions · 5,247 findings · 456 reviews

No studies found 1,142 · 21.8%GRADE not reported 1,503 · 28.6%Very low 1,040 · 19.8%Low 869 · 16.6%Moderate 554 · 10.6%High 139 · 2.6%

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

Orthodontic distalising appliance (intraoral or extraoral) vs no intervention

Number of visits to complete treatment · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Oral cancer incidence · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers showed no clear difference in oral cancer incidence compared with no screening; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Primary school-based behavioural intervention (both oral hygiene and dietary components) vs No treatment (or delayed treatment)

Changes in dental attendance · Children aged 4 to 12 years attending primary school
1 finding from 1 review

Interdental brushing plus toothbrushing vs Toothbrushing alone

Gingivitis · Adults, 16 years and older (dentate)

It is very uncertain whether interdental brushing plus toothbrushing changes gingivitis (Loe-Silness gingival index, interproximal; scale 0 to 4) compared with toothbrushing alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review · compare the 2 reviews

Intraoral distalising appliance vs Headgear (extraoral appliance)

Non-compliance rate of the intervention · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Quality of life · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Primary school-based behavioural intervention (both oral hygiene and dietary components) vs No treatment (or delayed treatment)

Behavioural outcomes (reported and/or other measures, e.g. data tracking toothbrushes and collecting food wrappers) · Children aged 4 to 12 years attending primary school

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride varnish vs placebo or no treatment

Proportion of children developing new caries (permanent) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride varnish showed no clear difference in proportion of children developing one or more new caries (permanent… compared with placebo or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Intraoral distalising appliance vs Another (different) intraoral distalising appliance

Duration of treatment · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
1 finding from 1 review

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Test performance (sensitivity and specificity) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…
1 finding from 1 review

Intraoral distalising appliance vs Headgear (extraoral appliance)

Duration of treatment · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
1 finding from 1 review

Triclosan/copolymer-containing fluoride toothpaste vs Fluoride toothpaste without triclosan

Tooth staining/discolouration (adverse effect) · Children and adults (aged 16 years or less = children, over 16 = adults) without periodontitis at baseline; in practice mostly adults,…

Triclosan/copolymer-containing fluoride toothpaste showed no clear difference in adverse effects (tooth staining, Meckel Stain Score, 6 months) compared with fluoride toothpaste without triclosan; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Intraoral distalising appliance vs Another (different) intraoral distalising appliance

Non-compliance rate of the intervention · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Asthma symptoms measured using various techniques. · patients with asthma aged eight years or older
1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Quality of life Measured using various scales. · patients with asthma aged eight years or older
1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Exercise tolerance Measured using 6MWD · patients with asthma aged eight years or older
1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

PEFR L/min · patients with asthma aged eight years or older
1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

VEmax · patients with asthma aged eight years or older
1 finding from 1 review