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.

Laser (low-level laser) at P6 point vs sham control

Reduction in gagging (assessor-reported) · People (older than four years) classified as having gagging that interfered with dental treatment; included trials enrolled children

It is very uncertain whether laser (low-level laser) at P6 point changes reduction in gagging (assessor-reported) compared with control (sham/dummy laser) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

CD4+ T-cell count below 250 cells/mm3

HIV-related oral lesions · Children living with HIV receiving ART

One reported study did not show a clear difference in HIV-related oral lesions for children with CD4+ T-cell counts below 250 cells/mm3.

2 findings from 1 review

Low parental socioeconomic status (SES) vs High parental socioeconomic status (SES)

Early childhood caries (ECC) · Healthy children under 6 years in South Africa

No significant difference in caries odds was found between children of low- versus high-SES parents (meta-analysis reported no difference; pooled estimate in an unavailable supplementary figure; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment vs Ramstadius pressure ulcer risk assessment

Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · individuals at risk of pressure ulcer development

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment showed no clear difference in pressure ulcer incidence Visual skin assessment compared with ramstadius pressure ulcer risk assessment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment vs Ramstadius pressure ulcer risk assessment

Severity of new pressure ulcers ‐ Stage 1 · individuals at risk of pressure ulcer development

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment showed no clear difference in severity of new pressure ulcers ‐ Stage 1 compared with ramstadius pressure ulcer risk assessment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment vs Ramstadius pressure ulcer risk assessment

Severity of new pressure ulcers ‐ Stage 2 · individuals at risk of pressure ulcer development

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment showed no clear difference in severity of new pressure ulcers ‐ Stage 2 compared with ramstadius pressure ulcer risk assessment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment vs pressure ulcer risk assessment using clinical judgement

Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · individuals at risk of pressure ulcer development

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment showed no clear difference in pressure ulcer incidence Visual skin assessment compared with pressure ulcer risk assessment using clinical judgement (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment vs pressure ulcer risk assessment using clinical judgement

Severity of new pressure ulcers ‐ Stage 1 · individuals at risk of pressure ulcer development

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment showed no clear difference in severity of new pressure ulcers ‐ Stage 1 compared with pressure ulcer risk assessment using clinical judgement (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment vs pressure ulcer risk assessment using clinical judgement

Severity of new pressure ulcers ‐ Stage 2 · individuals at risk of pressure ulcer development

Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment showed no clear difference in severity of new pressure ulcers ‐ Stage 2 compared with pressure ulcer risk assessment using clinical judgement (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Lower family socioeconomic status / income vs Higher socioeconomic position

Dental caries · Healthy children and adolescents in the United Arab Emirates

Evidence on socioeconomic status/income and caries was inconsistent: some studies linked lower income to higher caries while others found no association (narrative synthesis; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Low tooth brushing frequency (<2 times/day) vs High tooth brushing frequency (>=2 times/day)

Early childhood caries (ECC) · Healthy children under 6 years of age (6 months to 6 years); preschool children

After excluding an extreme outlier (Alhabdan 2018), the association between low brushing frequency and ECC remained statistically significant (pooled OR approximately 2.0, p=0.003; I2=87.5%); the exact estimate and its CI were not reported; ungraded.

2 findings from 1 review