evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

2,434 questions · 2,594 findings · 269 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 543 · 20.9%GRADE not reported 191 · 7.4%Very low 676 · 26.1%Low 732 · 28.2%Moderate 399 · 15.4%High 53 · 2%

Four per cent chlorhexidine + hand hygiene promotion vs usual care

Authors reported adverse outcomes (events without hospitalisation) · Neonates and caregivers

It is very uncertain whether four per cent chlorhexidine + hand hygiene promotion changes authors reported adverse outcomes (events without hospitalisation) compared with usual care (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral health education only (verbal, written, or audio-visual education) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Oral-health-education-only interventions showed at most a marginal effect on tooth-level caries (dmft SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.21 to -0.00; 2 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral health education only (verbal, written, or audio-visual education) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience at the surface level (dmfs/defs) · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Oral-health-education-only interventions did not show a statistically significant effect on surface-level caries (dmfs SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.03; 2 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Comprehensive oral health intervention (oral health education plus additional support: motivational interviewing, toothbrush/toothpaste provision, community engagement, and/or fluoride varnish/sealant application) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience at the surface level (dmfs/defs) · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Comprehensive interventions produced a small, statistically significant reduction in surface-level caries (dmfs SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.02; 10 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Behaviour change / oral health promotion interventions delivered by non-dental professionals and health workers (nurses, midwives, health visitors, community health workers) vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience at the surface level (dmfs/defs) · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Behaviour change interventions delivered by non-dental health workers produced a small, statistically significant reduction in caries experience at the surface level (dmfs SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.04; 12 studies); the review judged the overall evidence to be of low quality (not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Comprehensive oral health intervention (oral health education plus additional support: motivational interviewing, toothbrush/toothpaste provision, community engagement, and/or fluoride varnish/sealant application) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Comprehensive interventions produced a statistically significant reduction in tooth-level caries (dmft SMD -0.47, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.10; 4 studies; not GRADE-rated), though heterogeneity was very high.

1 finding from 1 review

Behaviour change / oral health promotion interventions delivered by non-dental professionals and health workers (nurses, midwives, health visitors, community health workers) vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Behaviour change interventions delivered by non-dental health workers produced a small-to-moderate, statistically significant reduction in caries experience at the tooth level (dmft SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.54 to -0.13; 6 studies); the review judged the overall evidence to be of low quality (not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Standard ready‐to‐use therapeutic food (RUTF) provided at a dose that meets total daily nutritional requirements vs as a supplement to the usual diet

Relapse during intervention defined as admission to inpatient therapeutic care or recurrence of oedema or systematic infections during the study period, and dropouts during intervention period · children aged 6 months‐5 years with SAM (1 study included HIV‐uninfected children; 1 study included HIV‐infected children), all of whom…

Standard ready‐to‐use therapeutic food (RUTF) provided at a dose… may leads to lower relapse during intervention defined as admission to inpatient… compared with as a supplement to the usual diet (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Enhanced multidisciplinary team (EMDT) vs usual care

Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · people with pressure ulcers residing in long‐term‐care facilities

It is very uncertain whether enhanced multidisciplinary team (EMDT) changes pressure ulcer incidence rate compared with usual care (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Enhanced multidisciplinary team (EMDT) vs usual care

Number of pressure ulcers healed · people with pressure ulcers residing in long‐term‐care facilities

It is very uncertain whether enhanced multidisciplinary team (EMDT) changes number of pressure ulcers healed compared with usual care (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review