Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

137 questions · 158 findings · 21 reviews · Oral Health

No studies found 49 · 31%GRADE not reported 73 · 46.2%Very low 19 · 12%Low 9 · 5.7%Moderate 8 · 5.1%High 0 · 0%

38% SDF (every 6 months) vs no treatment

Inactive (arrested) carious lesions on permanent first molars · Children with dental caries in permanent (first) molars

Six-monthly SDF produced significantly more inactive (arrested) lesions than no treatment in children's permanent molars (0.3 vs 0.1; p<0.05; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Clear aligners (Invisalign / thermoformed aligners) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Plaque · Orthodontic patients undergoing comprehensive treatment (late mixed or permanent dentition, no active caries)

In randomized trials, clear aligners probably reduce plaque accumulation versus fixed appliances, though the subgroup estimate is imprecise and its CI crosses no effect (SMD -1.79, 95% CI -3.63 to 0.04; moderate certainty).

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

Clear aligners (Invisalign / thermoformed aligners) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

White spot lesion incidence · Orthodontic patients undergoing comprehensive treatment (late mixed or permanent dentition, no active caries)

Most studies reported a lower incidence of white spot lesions with clear aligners than fixed appliances, but heterogeneous assessment methods precluded meta-analysis (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Clear aligners (Invisalign / thermoformed aligners) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Severity of white spot lesions (surface area and depth) · Orthodontic patients undergoing comprehensive treatment (late mixed or permanent dentition, no active caries)

White spot lesion severity was assessed narratively in a small number of studies and not meta-analyzed; evidence is limited (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Clear aligners (Invisalign / thermoformed aligners) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Salivary caries-associated bacteria (S. mutans and Lactobacilli, subjects with >10^5 CFU/mL) · Orthodontic patients undergoing comprehensive treatment (late mixed or permanent dentition, no active caries)

Both included studies reported higher salivary caries-associated bacteria (S. mutans and Lactobacilli) with fixed appliances than clear aligners; not meta-analyzed (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

38% silver diamine fluoride vs Active dentine caries at baseline (single-arm before vs after proportion)

Arrest of dentine caries · Children with dentine caries in primary and permanent teeth

Professionally applied 38% silver diamine fluoride arrested about two-thirds of active dentine caries surfaces in children (pooled proportion 65.9%, 95% CI 41.2% to 90.7%; 5 studies); certainty was not GRADE-rated and heterogeneity was very high (I2=96%).

1 finding from 1 review

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) applied after subgingival instrumentation (SI) vs Subgingival instrumentation (SI) alone (hand or power-driven, or both), or SI plus placebo/sham aPDT

Pocket closure · Adults (> 18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of periodontitis, receiving active (non-surgical anti-infective) treatment
2 findings from 1 review

Physiotherapy (tongue-spatula jaw exercises) vs No active treatment (control)

Maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance) · People of any age with a confirmed diagnosis, by clinical examination and biopsy, of oral submucous fibrosis (OSF)

It is very uncertain whether physiotherapy (tongue-spatula jaw exercises) changes maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance) compared with no active treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) with glass ionomer cement (GIC) or glass ionomer material

Caries arrestment at the individual (patient) level · Children and adults with active dental caries (aged 1-50; mostly preschool/school children with primary dentition)

In one trial, SDF greatly increased individual-level caries arrestment versus ART/glass ionomer cement (OR 18.03); this subgroup was not separately GRADE-rated.

1 finding from 1 review

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) applied after subgingival instrumentation (SI) vs Subgingival instrumentation (SI) alone (hand or power-driven, or both), or SI plus placebo/sham aPDT

Patient satisfaction · Adults (> 18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of periodontitis, receiving active (non-surgical anti-infective) treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) applied after subgingival instrumentation (SI) vs Subgingival instrumentation (SI) alone (hand or power-driven, or both), or SI plus placebo/sham aPDT

Any adverse effect related to aPDT · Adults (> 18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of periodontitis, receiving active (non-surgical anti-infective) treatment
1 finding from 1 review

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) applied after submucosal instrumentation (SI) vs Submucosal instrumentation (SI) alone, or SI plus placebo/sham aPDT

Quality of life · Adults (> 18 years) with peri-implant mucositis, receiving active treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) applied after subgingival instrumentation (SI) vs Subgingival instrumentation (SI) alone (hand or power-driven, or both), or SI plus placebo/sham aPDT

Change in probing pocket depth (PPD) · Adults (> 18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of periodontitis, receiving active (non-surgical anti-infective) treatment

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) applied after… led to higher change in probing pocket depth (PPD) compared with subgingival instrumentation (SI) alone (hand or power-driven, or…; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) applied after subgingival instrumentation (SI) vs Subgingival instrumentation (SI) alone (hand or power-driven, or both), or SI plus placebo/sham aPDT

Attachment change · Adults (> 18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of periodontitis, receiving active (non-surgical anti-infective) treatment

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) applied after… led to higher change in clinical attachment level (CAL) compared with subgingival instrumentation (SI) alone (hand or power-driven, or…; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Antioxidants (lycopene, curcumin, Oxitard) vs Placebo or no active treatment

Participant-reported resumption of normal eating, chewing and speech · People of any age with a confirmed diagnosis, by clinical examination and biopsy, of oral submucous fibrosis (OSF)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Vasodilator vs Placebo or no active treatment

Maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance) · People of any age with a confirmed diagnosis, by clinical examination and biopsy, of oral submucous fibrosis (OSF)

It is very uncertain whether vasodilators (isoxsuprine, xanthinol nicotinate) changes maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance) compared with placebo or no active treatment (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) applied after submucosal instrumentation (SI) vs Submucosal instrumentation (SI) alone, or SI plus placebo/sham aPDT

Change in gingival recession (REC) · Adults (> 18 years) with peri-implant mucositis, receiving active treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review