Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

1,127 questions · 1,590 findings · 132 reviews · All outcomes

No studies found 189 · 11.9%GRADE not reported 1,166 · 73.3%Very low 130 · 8.2%Low 69 · 4.3%Moderate 25 · 1.6%High 11 · 0.7%

Vertical ramus osteotomy (VRO) with osteosynthesis vs Vertical ramus osteotomy (VRO) without osteosynthesis

Changes in condyle position: fossa-condyle relations for posterior (1 year post-operative) · Adults (16 years of age or older) with an Angle Class III malocclusion (prominent lower front teeth); people with syndromes, clefts or…

Vertical ramus osteotomy (VRO) with osteosynthesis showed no clear difference in changes in condyle position: fossa-condyle relations for posterior… compared with vertical ramus osteotomy (VRO) without osteosynthesis; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) vs Sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO)

Stability of correction: vertical changes of pogonion (1 week to 1 year) · Adults (16 years of age or older) with an Angle Class III malocclusion (prominent lower front teeth); people with syndromes, clefts or…

Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) showed no clear difference in stability of correction: vertical changes of pogonion (1 week to 1… compared with sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) vs Sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO)

Stability of correction: sagittal changes of B-point (1 week to 1 year) · Adults (16 years of age or older) with an Angle Class III malocclusion (prominent lower front teeth); people with syndromes, clefts or…

Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) showed no clear difference in stability of correction: sagittal changes of B-point (1 week to 1… compared with sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) vs Sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO)

Stability of correction: sagittal changes of pogonion (1 week to 1 year) · Adults (16 years of age or older) with an Angle Class III malocclusion (prominent lower front teeth); people with syndromes, clefts or…

Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) showed no clear difference in stability of correction: sagittal changes of pogonion (1 week to 1… compared with sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) vs Sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO)

Stability of correction: vertical changes of B-point (1 week to 1 year) · Adults (16 years of age or older) with an Angle Class III malocclusion (prominent lower front teeth); people with syndromes, clefts or…

Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) showed no clear difference in stability of correction: vertical changes of B-point (1 week to 1… compared with sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Oral paracetamol vs placebo

At least 50% reduction in pain · Patients requiring surgical removal of a lower wisdom tooth or teeth, with baseline moderate to severe pain (surgery under local…

Paracetamol (single oral dose, any dose or formulation; subgroups up… led to higher achieving at least 50% pain relief at 4 hours (using pain intensity… compared with placebo; GRADE not reported.

3 findings from 1 review

Oral paracetamol vs placebo

Patients with one or more adverse events · Patients requiring surgical removal of a lower wisdom tooth or teeth, with baseline moderate to severe pain (surgery under local…

Paracetamol (single oral dose, any dose or formulation; subgroups up… showed no clear difference in patients with one or more adverse events compared with placebo; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Oral paracetamol vs placebo

Participant‐reported pain relief of 50% or greater · Patients requiring surgical removal of a lower wisdom tooth or teeth, with baseline moderate to severe pain (surgery under local…

Paracetamol (single oral dose, any dose or formulation; subgroups up… led to higher achieving at least 50% pain relief at 6 hours (using pain relief… compared with placebo; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Genetically predicted periodontitis vs Lower genetically predicted periodontitis liability

Lumbar spine and pelvis fracture · European GWAS participants

The SVMR Weighted Median interval included the null.

3 findings from 1 review

Genetically predicted periodontitis vs Lower genetically predicted periodontitis liability

Osteoporosis · European GWAS participants

The SVMR MR-Egger interval included the null.

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

Replacement of the defective restoration vs Repair of the defective restoration

Amalgam: Preference for replacement over repair - Scenario 8: disruption of occlusal integrity · Dentists managing a defective direct amalgam restoration (posterior occlusal Class I; standardized vignette of a 30-year-old,…

For a defective amalgam restoration with disruption of occlusal integrity, surveyed dentists most often preferred replacement over repair (pooled RR 1.70; p < 0.001); ungraded.

1 finding from 1 review

Genetically predicted periodontitis vs Lower genetically predicted periodontitis liability

Osteoporosis with pathological fracture · European GWAS participants

The SVMR Weighted Median interval included the null.

3 findings from 1 review

Higher drinking-water fluoride exposure vs Null / lowest drinking-water fluoride exposure (reference)

Fracture · general population

Non-linear positive dose-response: little change in overall fracture risk below ~1.5 mg/L drinking-water fluoride, with risk increasing above that threshold (RR 1.06, 1.19, 1.35 at 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 mg/L vs null); ungraded (4 studies).

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

Genetically predicted DMFS (dental caries) vs Reference (1-SD lower genetically predicted DMFS)

Osteoporosis with pathological fracture · European-ancestry adults

In multivariable MR, genetically predicted dental caries (DMFS) had no significant causal effect on osteoporosis with pathological fracture (OR 1.279, not significant).

2 findings from 1 review

Genetically predicted DMFS (dental caries) vs Lower genetically predicted DMFS

Postmenopausal osteoporosis with pathological fracture · European GWAS participants

The SVMR Maximum Likelihood interval included the null.

3 findings from 1 review

Genetically predicted DMFS (dental caries) vs Reference (1-SD lower genetically predicted DMFS)

Osteoporosis · European-ancestry adults

In multivariable MR (adjusted for periodontitis), higher genetically predicted dental caries (DMFS) causally increased osteoporosis risk (OR 1.165, moderate evidence).

2 findings from 1 review

Genetically predicted DMFS (dental caries) vs Reference (1-SD lower genetically predicted DMFS)

Bone mineral density in forearm · European-ancestry adults

Genetically predicted dental caries (DMFS) had no causal effect on forearm BMD.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher drinking-water fluoride exposure vs Null / lowest drinking-water fluoride exposure (reference)

Risk of femoral fractures · general population

Femoral-fracture risk was mildly U-shaped: RR 0.86 at 0.5 mg/L rising to 1.06 at 1.8 mg/L drinking-water fluoride vs null; risk mostly below null across the range; ungraded.

2 findings from 1 review
  • The association of fluoride exposure with bone density and fracture risk: a dose-response meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomes
    Long-term / lifetime fluoride exposure · General population; 37 observational studies (1944-2024), predominantly North America (USA, Canada) and Northern Europe (Finland, Sweden), plus UK, Poland, Italy, Germany, China, Taiwan, South Korea, Ethiopia; exposure mainly community drinking-water fluoride · Drinking-water fluoride 1.8 mg/L vs null
    RR 1.06 [0.67, 1.69]
    Studies not reported
    GRADE not reported
  • The association of fluoride exposure with bone density and fracture risk: a dose-response meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomes
    Long-term / lifetime fluoride exposure · General population; 37 observational studies (1944-2024), predominantly North America (USA, Canada) and Northern Europe (Finland, Sweden), plus UK, Poland, Italy, Germany, China, Taiwan, South Korea, Ethiopia; exposure mainly community drinking-water fluoride · Drinking-water fluoride 0.5 mg/L vs null
    RR 0.86 [0.71, 1.05]
    Studies not reported
    GRADE not reported