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%

AG + GG genotype (G-allele carriers) of ENAM rs3796704 vs AA genotype of ENAM rs3796704

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between AG + GG genotype (G-allele carriers) vs AA genotype of ENAM rs3796704 and dental caries susceptibility (AG + GG vs AA model: OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.03-2.17) in the Ethnicity: Mixed subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

GG genotype of LTF rs1126478 vs AA genotype of LTF rs1126478

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between GG genotype vs AA genotype of LTF rs1126478 and dental caries susceptibility (GG vs AA model: OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.73-1.29) in the Ethnicity: Asian subgroup; certainty not graded.

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

TT genotype of AMELX rs17878486 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs17878486

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC genotype of AMELX rs17878486 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC model: OR 5.12, 95% CI 0.09-278.85) in the Control group: Caries-free subgroup; certainty not graded.

8 findings from 1 review
Show 5 more findings

CT + TT genotype (T-allele carriers) of AMELX rs2106416 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs2106416

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between CT + TT genotype (T-allele carriers) vs CC genotype of AMELX rs2106416 and dental caries susceptibility (CT + TT vs CC model: OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.15-2.31) in the Age group: Children subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

G allele of LTF rs1126478 vs A allele of LTF rs1126478

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between G allele vs A allele of LTF rs1126478 and dental caries susceptibility (G vs A model: OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.87-1.10); certainty not graded.

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

T allele of AMELX rs17878486 vs C allele of AMELX rs17878486

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between T allele vs C allele of AMELX rs17878486 and dental caries susceptibility (T vs C model: OR 2.87, 95% CI 0.35-23.23) in the Control group: Caries-free subgroup; certainty not graded.

8 findings from 1 review
Show 5 more findings

CT genotype of AMELX rs2106416 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs2106416

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between CT genotype vs CC genotype of AMELX rs2106416 and dental caries susceptibility (CT vs CC model: OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.65-2.22) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

GG genotype of ENAM rs1264848 vs AA + AG genotype of ENAM rs1264848

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between GG genotype vs AA + AG genotype of ENAM rs1264848 and dental caries susceptibility (GG vs AA + AG model: OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.53-2.23) in the Ethnicity: Mixed subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

TT genotype of AMELX rs2106416 vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs2106416

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs2106416 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC + CT model: OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.44-6.34) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 12-month recall

Total time (examination plus treatment) (minutes) · Regular-attending primary-care dental patients aged 3, 16 or 18 years at entry (aged up to 20; low caries risk)

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in total time (examination plus treatment) (minutes) compared with clinical examination with 12-month recall; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

AG + GG genotype (G-allele carriers) of ENAM rs1264848 vs AA genotype of ENAM rs1264848

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between AG + GG genotype (G-allele carriers) vs AA genotype of ENAM rs1264848 and dental caries susceptibility (AG + GG vs AA model: OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.78-3.68) in the Ethnicity: Mixed subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

TT genotype of AMELX rs946252 vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs946252

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC + CT genotype of AMELX rs946252 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC + CT model: OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.19-2.87) in the Control group: Caries-free subgroup; certainty not graded.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

T allele of AMELX rs6639060 vs C allele of AMELX rs6639060

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between T allele vs C allele of AMELX rs6639060 and dental caries susceptibility (T vs C model: OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.63-1.85) in the Ethnicity: Caucasian subgroup; certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

High-volume evacuation (HVE) vs Conventional dental suction (low-volume evacuator / saliva ejector)

Reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) during ultrasonic scaling at 40 cm from mouth · People undergoing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) in a dental setting

It is very uncertain whether high-volume evacuation (HVE) changes reduction in level of contamination in aerosols (CFU) during… compared with conventional dental suction (low-volume evacuator / saliva ejector) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

TT genotype of AMELX rs2106416 vs CC genotype of AMELX rs2106416

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC genotype of AMELX rs2106416 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC model: OR 1.83, 95% CI 0.47-7.06); certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

TT genotype of ENAM rs3796703 vs CC + CT genotype of ENAM rs3796703

Dental caries susceptibility · Individuals assessed for dental caries (cases with caries/high caries vs. caries-free or low/very-low-caries controls)

No significant association between TT genotype vs CC + CT genotype of ENAM rs3796703 and dental caries susceptibility (TT vs CC + CT model: OR 2.90, 95% CI 0.92-9.12); certainty not graded.

3 findings from 1 review

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 12-month recall

Periodontal disease · Regular-attending primary-care dental patients aged 3, 16 or 18 years at entry (aged up to 20; low caries risk)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review