evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

828 questions · 1,477 findings · 103 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 5 · 0.3%GRADE not reported 1,402 · 94.9%Very low 38 · 2.6%Low 20 · 1.4%Moderate 11 · 0.7%High 1 · 0.1%

38% SDF plus oral health education vs oral health instruction plus water

new root-surface carious lesions or restorations · community-dwelling older adults with root caries

SDF plus oral health education had a 33% preventative fraction at 24 months; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF varnish plus oral health instruction vs oral health instruction plus water

new root-surface carious lesions or restorations · Older adults with root caries in permanent (mature) teeth (mean age 75 years)

SDF had a 71% preventative fraction at 36 months; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF every 12 months vs water every 12 months

new carious lesions or fillings at fissure-site level · children with caries in permanent molars

SDF had a 52% preventative fraction at fissure-site level; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF one-time application without brushing programme vs no treatment without brushing programme

new carious lesions or fillings · Children with dental caries in permanent (first) molars

The review reported no significant result for SDF; no effect estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

OHI + 38% SDF (applied every 12 months) vs oral health instruction plus water

new root-surface carious lesions or restorations · community-dwelling older adults with root caries

SDF had a 28% preventative fraction at 24 months; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Adaptive dragonfly algorithm with neural-network classifier vs KNN or SVM (not disaggregated in source)

Accuracy advantage in test case 2 · Dental images of human beings

The review reported a 52% accuracy advantage in Patil test case 2 (Ungraded).

2 findings from 1 review

Gene sequencing (GS) applied to diagnose/manage oral conditions (predominantly 16S rRNA next-generation sequencing of the oral microbiome; also genome-wide/whole-genome sequencing) vs Negligible ('abysmal') effect of gene sequencing; no separate comparator arm (within-sample event contrast in the forest plots)

Noticeable impact of gene sequencing on diagnosing/managing oral conditions · Human patients (any age) with oral-cavity related disorders (e.g. dental caries, periodontitis, gingivitis, peri-implant mucositis,…

Pooled across 8 clinical trials, gene sequencing had a statistically significant impact on diagnosing/managing oral-cavity disorders (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.46-0.54); certainty not GRADE-rated.

2 findings from 1 review

Gene sequencing (GS) applied to diagnose/manage oral conditions (predominantly 16S rRNA next-generation sequencing of the oral microbiome; also genome-wide/whole-genome sequencing) vs Negligible ('abysmal') effect of gene sequencing; no separate comparator arm (within-sample event contrast in the forest plots)

Reduction in occurrence of oral conditions · Human patients (any age) with oral-cavity related disorders (e.g. dental caries, periodontitis, gingivitis, peri-implant mucositis,…

Pooled across 8 clinical trials, gene sequencing was associated with a statistically significant risk difference for impact on oral-cavity disorders (RD -0.29, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.26); certainty not GRADE-rated.

1 finding from 1 review

Atraumatic restorative treatment vs placebo

Oral health-related quality of life · Children with dental caries

ART and placebo did not differ for oral health-related quality of life, based on an indirect network estimate with no direct trials (MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.38; ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review

Prior application of silver diamine fluoride (SDF), with or without a rinsing step vs No prior SDF application (untreated dentin control)

Immediate bond strength (MPa) · Dental adhesives/resin composite bonded to dentin (in vitro), sound or caries-affected

Prior SDF application significantly reduces the immediate bond strength of adhesives to dentin overall (MD 7.12 MPa favoring untreated dentin, 95% CI 1.38 to 12.85; ungraded), with very high heterogeneity (I2=98%).

1 finding from 1 review

Placebo vs Silver diamine fluoride

Oral health-related quality of life · Children with dental caries

The direct estimate found no statistically significant difference in oral health-related quality of life between placebo and silver diamine fluoride.

2 findings from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs placebo

Oral health-related quality of life · Children with dental caries

SDF did not significantly differ from placebo for oral health-related quality of life in children (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.22; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Atraumatic restorative treatment plus fluoride varnish vs Silver diamine fluoride plus fluoride varnish

Oral health-related quality of life · Children with dental caries

The direct estimate found no statistically significant difference in oral health-related quality of life between atraumatic restorative treatment plus fluoride varnish and silver diamine fluoride plus fluoride varnish.

2 findings from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART)

Oral health-related quality of life · Children with dental caries

SDF did not significantly differ from atraumatic restorative treatment for oral health-related quality of life (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.36; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Atraumatic restorative treatment vs Silver diamine fluoride

Oral health-related quality of life · Children with dental caries

The network estimate found no statistically significant difference in oral health-related quality of life between atraumatic restorative treatment and silver diamine fluoride.

2 findings from 1 review