evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

516 questions · 950 findings · 74 reviews · Dental caries

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 35 · 3.7%GRADE not reported 831 · 87.5%Very low 38 · 4%Low 26 · 2.7%Moderate 13 · 1.4%High 7 · 0.7%

Cessation of water fluoridation (fluoride removed from the water supply) vs Continued fluoridated water

Disparities in caries across socioeconomic status (SES) · People of all ages in a previously fluoridated community (Maupome 2001: children with generally low caries experience)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Cessation of water fluoridation (fluoride removed from the water supply) vs Continued fluoridated water

Adverse effects · People of all ages in a previously fluoridated community (Maupome 2001: children with generally low caries experience)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Initiation of water fluoridation (artificial or natural) vs Low/non-fluoridated water (0.4 ppm fluoride or less)

Caries in deciduous teeth (change in dmft) · People of all ages in a community setting; the included caries studies were all in children aged 3 to 16 years

Initiation of water fluoridation (artificial or natural) may leads to lower caries in deciduous teeth (change in dmft) compared with low/non-fluoridated water (0.4 ppm fluoride or less) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chlorhexidine chewing gum vs Placebo or no intervention (including routine care)

Outcome not reported · Children and adolescents below 18 years at study start (included studies: children from birth to 15 years), with mixed, permanent or…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Initiation of water fluoridation (artificial or natural) vs Low/non-fluoridated water (0.4 ppm fluoride or less)

Caries increment in permanent teeth · Children aged about 12 to 16 years (Hardwick 1982), community setting

Initiation of water fluoridation (artificial or natural) led to lower caries in permanent teeth (change in DMFS) compared with low/non-fluoridated water (0.4 ppm fluoride or less); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Chlorhexidine varnish vs placebo or no treatment

Dental caries: dmfs increment (primary teeth) · Children and adolescents below 18 years at study start (included studies: children from birth to 15 years), with mixed, permanent or…
1 finding from 1 review

Initiation of water fluoridation (artificial or natural) vs Low/non-fluoridated water (0.4 ppm fluoride or less)

Change in proportion of caries-free children (deciduous teeth) · People of all ages in a community setting; the included caries studies were all in children aged 3 to 16 years

Initiation of water fluoridation (artificial or natural) may leads to higher change in proportion of caries-free children (deciduous teeth) compared with low/non-fluoridated water (0.4 ppm fluoride or less) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Prostate cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Prostate cancer: OR 1.04 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.09), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Alzheimer’s disease · Participants in observational studies

The meta-analysis of observational studies reported a SMD (to OR) of 0.08 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.63) for higher versus lower circulating vitamin D concentration.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Aggressive prostate cancer · Participants in observational studies

The meta-analysis of observational studies reported a OR of 0.88 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.15) for higher versus lower circulating vitamin D concentration.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Type 2 diabetes mellitus · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Type 2 diabetes: OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.69), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Sporadic colorectal adenoma recurrence · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Sporadic colorectal adenoma recurrence: OR 0.87 (95% CI 0.57 to 1.33), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Ischaemic heart disease · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Ischaemic heart disease: HR 0.72 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.81), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher maternal circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower maternal circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Small‐for‐gestational age · pregnant women and their infants..

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower maternal 25(OH)D) for Small for gestational age: OR 0.54 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.67), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) concentration vs Lower circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) concentration

Prostate cancer · Participants in observational studies

The meta-analysis of observational studies reported a OR of 0.99 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.12) for higher versus lower circulating vitamin D concentration.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Breast cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Breast cancer (Premenopausal): RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.06), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.

3 findings from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

All cause mortality · people with chronic kidney disease (predialysis (GFR 15 to 60 mL/min/1.73 m²), HD, PD, transplant recipients)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for All cause mortality, Patients with chronic kidney disease: RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.92), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Metabolic syndrome (prevalent) · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Metabolic syndrome (prevalent): OR 0.49 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.64), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Cognitive function · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Cognition: OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.53), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher maternal circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower maternal circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Pre‐eclampsia · pregnant women and their infants..

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower maternal 25(OH)D) for Pre-eclampsia: OR 0.56 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.80), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review