Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

1,340 questions · 1,512 findings · 205 reviews

No studies found 317 · 21%GRADE not reported 358 · 23.7%Very low 356 · 23.5%Low 271 · 17.9%Moderate 173 · 11.4%High 37 · 2.4%

Meropenem vs usual care

All‐cause mortality maximum · newborns with late‐onset sepsis

It is very uncertain whether meropenem changes all‐cause mortality maximum compared with standard care (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Autologous platelet concentrates (APC) + open flap debridement (OFD) vs Open flap debridement (access flap surgery)

Change in probing pocket depth (PPD) · Patients affected by infrabony defects requiring surgical treatment, regardless of their age or gender

It is very uncertain whether autologous platelet concentrates (APC) + open flap debridement (OFD) changes change in probing depth (PD) (mm) compared with OFD (open flap debridement) alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Autologous platelet concentrates (APC) + open flap debridement (OFD) vs Open flap debridement (access flap surgery)

Tooth survival · Patients affected by infrabony defects requiring surgical treatment, regardless of their age or gender
1 finding from 1 review

Autologous platelet concentrates (APC) + open flap debridement (OFD) vs Open flap debridement (access flap surgery)

Change in radiographic bone defect filling (RBF) (%) · Patients affected by infrabony defects requiring surgical treatment, regardless of their age or gender

It is very uncertain whether autologous platelet concentrates (APC) + open flap debridement (OFD) changes change in radiographic bone defect filling (RBF) (%) compared with OFD (open flap debridement) alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Autologous platelet concentrates (APC) + open flap debridement (OFD) vs Open flap debridement (access flap surgery)

Oral health-related quality of life · Patients affected by infrabony defects requiring surgical treatment, regardless of their age or gender

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Autologous platelet concentrates (APC) + open flap debridement (OFD) vs Open flap debridement (access flap surgery)

Attachment change · Patients affected by infrabony defects requiring surgical treatment, regardless of their age or gender

It is very uncertain whether autologous platelet concentrates (APC) + open flap debridement (OFD) changes change in clinical attachment level (CAL) (mm) compared with OFD (open flap debridement) alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Autologous platelet concentrates (APC) + open flap debridement (OFD) vs Open flap debridement (access flap surgery)

Pocket closure (complete pocket closure) · Patients affected by infrabony defects requiring surgical treatment, regardless of their age or gender
1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Gum health: midbuccal gingival recession (mm) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: midbuccal gingival recession (mm) compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Probing pocket depth · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: periodontal probing depth compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Complications or adverse effects · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)
1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Pain intensity (0‐10cm visual analogue scale) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in patient response: pain/soreness score (visual analogue scale 1 to 10) compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Treatment time: time from surgical exposure to eruption/bonding a bracket · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure led to lower treatment time: time from surgical exposure to eruption/bonding a… compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Discomfort/pain · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)
1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Aesthetics: canine rated as abnormal position in the dental arch · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in aesthetics: canine rated as abnormal position in the dental arch compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Gum health: bleeding on probing (Papilla Bleeding Index) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: bleeding on probing (Papilla Bleeding Index) compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Gum health: gingival recession (six-point probing) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: gingival recession (six-point probing) compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Patient response: total discomfort score (pain, difficulty eating, brushing, speaking, bad taste) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in patient response: total discomfort score (pain, difficulty eating,… compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Aesthetics: canine rated as abnormal tooth inclination · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in aesthetics: canine rated as abnormal tooth inclination compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Patient response: moderate or severe pain at 1 day postoperative · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in patient response: moderate or severe pain at 1 day postoperative compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Treatment time: duration of orthodontic treatment (placement to removal of fixed appliances) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in treatment time: duration of orthodontic treatment (placement to… compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review