Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,410 questions · 8,901 findings · 1,091 reviews

No studies found 1,687 · 19%GRADE not reported 1,469 · 16.5%Very low 1,969 · 22.1%Low 2,060 · 23.1%Moderate 1,302 · 14.6%High 414 · 4.7%

Ranked among the 5,000 newest matching findings; add words or filters to narrow the search.

Growth stunting (linear growth retardation, low height-for-age) vs Children without growth stunting (normal height-for-age)

Early childhood caries (ECC) · Children aged ≤6 years (early childhood)

One Nigerian cross-sectional study reported a significant adjusted association between nutritional (stunting) status and ECC (APR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.69); ungraded.

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

Resin infiltration vs Pre-treatment baseline before infiltration (T0); pooled as a within-arm before/after change

Lightness/brightness change of white spot lesion (luminosity L*, T0 to T1) · Patients with post-orthodontic white spot lesions and permanent dentition

ICON resin infiltration showed no statistically significant change in lightness/brightness of post-orthodontic white spot lesions at 6 months (pooled Cohen's d/SMD -0.001, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.23; 3 studies, 330 teeth; I2=97%); not GRADE-rated.

1 finding from 1 review

Resin infiltration vs Pre-treatment baseline before infiltration (T0); pooled as a within-arm before/after change

Color change of white spot lesion (color difference, T0 to T1) · Patients with post-orthodontic white spot lesions and permanent dentition

ICON resin infiltration significantly improved the color of post-orthodontic white spot lesions at 6 months (pooled Cohen's d/SMD 1.36, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.59; 4 studies, 458 teeth), although heterogeneity was very high (I2=98%) with a heavy outlier (Kannan); not GRADE-rated.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy vs no treatment

Canine expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy showed no clear difference in canine expansion compared with no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    12 months after start of treatment
    U-bow activator 3.6 mm vs untreated 1 mm; P<0.001 (no SD reported); significant in favour of treatment
    1 study · 66 participants
    GRADE not reported

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy vs no treatment

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy showed no clear difference in molar expansion compared with no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    12 months after start of treatment
    U-bow activator 5.1 mm vs untreated 0.8 mm; P<0.001 (no SD reported); significant in favour of treatment
    1 study · 66 participants
    GRADE not reported

Indirect bonding using flowable composite adhesive (Opal Bond MV) vs Direct bonding (conventional, Transbond XT)

White spot lesion formation (QLF: fluorescence loss, lesion area) · Patients undergoing fixed orthodontic (fixed appliance) treatment (adolescents and adults, ages 12 to 35)

A single RCT found indirect bonding with flowable composite reduced white spot lesion formation versus direct bonding (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Chemotherapy with bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab maintenance vs chemotherapy alone

Overall survival (OS) · platinum‐sensitive recurrent EOC

Chemotherapy with bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab maintenance showed no clear difference in overall survival (OS) compared with chemotherapy alone (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chemotherapy with bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab maintenance vs chemotherapy alone

Progression‐free survival · newly‐diagnosed EOC

It is very uncertain whether chemotherapy with bevacizumab followed by maintenance bevacizumab changes progression‐free survival (PFS) compared with chemotherapy alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chemotherapy with bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab maintenance vs chemotherapy alone

Progression‐free survival · platinum‐sensitive recurrent EOC

Chemotherapy with bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab maintenance probably leads to lower progression‐free survival (PFS) compared with chemotherapy alone (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chemotherapy with bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab maintenance vs chemotherapy alone

Adverse events (grade ≥ 3) · platinum‐sensitive recurrent EOC

Chemotherapy with bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab maintenance leads to higher any adverse event (grade ≥3) compared with chemotherapy alone (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review