Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

602 questions · 963 findings · 90 reviews

No studies found 118 · 12.3%GRADE not reported 578 · 60%Very low 93 · 9.7%Low 92 · 9.6%Moderate 59 · 6.1%High 23 · 2.4%

Sealant + 5% NaF varnish vs Sealant

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated occlusal carious lesions · Children and adults with noncavitated carious lesions on occlusal surfaces (primary and permanent teeth)

Sealant + 5% NaF varnish was probably more effective than Sealant for arrest or reversal of occlusal carious lesions (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.27; moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Resin infiltration vs Resin infiltration + 5% NaF varnish

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated approximal carious lesions · Children and adults with noncavitated carious lesions on approximal surfaces (primary and permanent teeth)

Resin infiltration may not differ from Resin infiltration + 5% NaF varnish for arrest or reversal of approximal carious lesions (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.23; very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

1.23% APF gel + oral health education vs Oral health education

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated facial/lingual carious lesions · Children and adults with noncavitated carious lesions on facial/lingual surfaces (primary and permanent teeth)

1.23% APF gel + oral health education was probably more effective than Oral health education for arrest or reversal of facial/lingual carious lesions (RR 2.47, 95% CI 1.95 to 3.13; moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

0.2% NaF mouthrinse + supervised toothbrushing vs Resin infiltration + 5% NaF varnish

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated occlusal carious lesions · Children and adults with noncavitated carious lesions on occlusal surfaces (primary and permanent teeth)

0.2% NaF mouthrinse + supervised toothbrushing was probably less effective than Resin infiltration + 5% NaF varnish for arrest or reversal of occlusal carious lesions (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.85; moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride varnish vs no treatment

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated facial/lingual carious lesions · Children and adults with noncavitated carious lesions on facial/lingual surfaces (primary and permanent teeth)

5% NaF varnish may be more effective than no treatment for arrest or reversal of facial/lingual carious lesions (RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.58 to 3.34; low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride varnish vs no treatment

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated occlusal carious lesions · Children and adults with noncavitated carious lesions on occlusal surfaces (primary and permanent teeth)

5% NaF varnish was probably more effective than no treatment for arrest or reversal of occlusal carious lesions (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.4; moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

0.2% NaF mouthrinse + supervised toothbrushing vs no treatment

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated occlusal carious lesions · Children and adults with noncavitated carious lesions on occlusal surfaces (primary and permanent teeth)

0.2% NaF mouthrinse + supervised toothbrushing was probably more effective than no treatment for arrest or reversal of occlusal carious lesions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.46; moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF + potassium iodide solution (applied annually) vs Fluoride varnish

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated and cavitated root carious lesions · Adults (including institutionalized/older adults) with noncavitated and cavitated carious lesions on root surfaces (permanent teeth)

38% SDF + potassium iodide solution (applied annually) may not differ from 5% NaF varnish for arrest or reversal of root carious lesions (RR 0.8, 95% CI 0.05 to 11.95; very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

1% chlorhexidine + 1% thymol varnish vs 38% SDF solution (applied annually)

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated and cavitated root carious lesions · Adults (including institutionalized/older adults) with noncavitated and cavitated carious lesions on root surfaces (permanent teeth)

1% chlorhexidine + 1% thymol varnish may not differ from 38% SDF solution (applied annually) for arrest or reversal of root carious lesions (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.14 to 5.6; very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

1% chlorhexidine + 1% thymol varnish vs 5,000-ppm F (1.1% NaF) toothpaste or gel

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated and cavitated root carious lesions · Adults (including institutionalized/older adults) with noncavitated and cavitated carious lesions on root surfaces (permanent teeth)

1% chlorhexidine + 1% thymol varnish may not differ from 5,000-ppm F (1.1% NaF) toothpaste or gel for arrest or reversal of root carious lesions (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.7; very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Sealant + 5% NaF varnish vs no treatment

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated occlusal carious lesions · Children and adults with noncavitated carious lesions on occlusal surfaces (primary and permanent teeth)

Sealant + 5% NaF varnish was probably more effective than no treatment for arrest or reversal of occlusal carious lesions (RR 3.35, 95% CI 2.42 to 4.64; moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Resin infiltration + 5% NaF varnish vs Sealants plus fluoride varnish (with or without restorations)

Arrest or reversal of noncavitated occlusal carious lesions · Children and adults with noncavitated carious lesions on occlusal surfaces (primary and permanent teeth)

Resin infiltration + 5% NaF varnish may not differ from Sealant + 5% NaF varnish for arrest or reversal of occlusal carious lesions (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.21; low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Visual caries detection (ICDAS visual/visual-tactile inspection) vs Reference standard (often histological; also invasive opening)

All occlusal carious lesions · Permanent molar surfaces in diagnostic accuracy studies (mostly in vitro; clinical)

Pooled specificity for visual detection of all occlusal lesions was 0.770 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.81).

2 findings from 1 review

Radiographic caries detection (bitewing radiography) vs Reference standard (histological validation or cavity/lesion opening; advanced = cavitated/dentin-involved lesions, all = enamel-confined initial lesions also counted)

Negative LR for detecting advanced proximal caries · Proximal surfaces of permanent molars (demonstrated in 12-14 year-olds; underlying diagnostic accuracy studies, mostly in vitro)

In the conventional (all-studies) meta-analysis, the negative lr of radiographic detection for advanced proximal caries was 0.58 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.65) (ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review

Visual caries detection (ICDAS visual/visual-tactile inspection) vs Reference standard (histological validation or cavity/lesion opening; advanced = cavitated/dentin-involved lesions, all = enamel-confined initial lesions also counted)

Specificity for detecting all (initial and advanced) occlusal caries · Occlusal surfaces of permanent molars (demonstrated in 12-14 year-olds; underlying diagnostic accuracy studies, mostly in vitro)

In the conventional (all-studies) meta-analysis, pooled specificity of visual detection for all (initial and advanced) occlusal caries was 75.3% (95% CI 70 to 80) (ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review

Visual caries detection (ICDAS visual/visual-tactile inspection) vs Reference standard (histological validation or cavity/lesion opening; advanced = cavitated/dentin-involved lesions, all = enamel-confined initial lesions also counted)

PPV for detecting advanced occlusal caries · Occlusal surfaces of permanent molars (demonstrated in 12-14 year-olds; underlying diagnostic accuracy studies, mostly in vitro)

In the German private-practice setting, the positive predictive value of visual detection for advanced occlusal caries was 77.9% at an assumed prevalence of 22.0% (ungraded).

2 findings from 1 review

Radiographic caries detection (bitewing radiography) vs Reference standard (histological validation or cavity/lesion opening; advanced = cavitated/dentin-involved lesions, all = enamel-confined initial lesions also counted)

NPV for detecting all (initial and advanced) occlusal caries · Occlusal surfaces of permanent molars (demonstrated in 12-14 year-olds; underlying diagnostic accuracy studies, mostly in vitro)

In the German private-practice setting, the negative predictive value of radiographic detection for all (initial and advanced) occlusal caries was 91.4% at an assumed prevalence of 11.0% (ungraded).

2 findings from 1 review

Radiographic caries detection vs Reference standard (often histological; also invasive opening)

Advanced proximal carious lesions · Permanent molar surfaces in diagnostic accuracy studies (mostly in vitro; clinical)

Pooled sensitivity for radiographic detection of advanced proximal lesions was 0.444 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.51).

8 findings from 1 review
Show 5 more findings

Radiographic caries detection (bitewing radiography) vs Reference standard (histological validation or cavity/lesion opening; advanced = cavitated/dentin-involved lesions, all = enamel-confined initial lesions also counted)

Negative LR for detecting advanced occlusal caries · Occlusal surfaces of permanent molars (demonstrated in 12-14 year-olds; underlying diagnostic accuracy studies, mostly in vitro)

In the conventional (all-studies) meta-analysis, the negative lr of radiographic detection for advanced occlusal caries was 0.53 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.62) (ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review

Visual caries detection (ICDAS visual/visual-tactile inspection) vs Reference standard (histological validation or cavity/lesion opening; advanced = cavitated/dentin-involved lesions, all = enamel-confined initial lesions also counted)

Sensitivity for detecting all (initial and advanced) occlusal caries · Occlusal surfaces of permanent molars (demonstrated in 12-14 year-olds; underlying diagnostic accuracy studies, mostly in vitro)

In the meta-analysis tailored to Germany, pooled sensitivity of visual detection for all (initial and advanced) occlusal caries was 49.1% (95% CI 40 to 58) (ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review