Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

150 questions · 205 findings · 31 reviews · Oral Health

No studies found 34 · 16.6%GRADE not reported 138 · 67.3%Very low 14 · 6.8%Low 13 · 6.3%Moderate 6 · 2.9%High 0 · 0%

Educational intervention with information and practical components (theoretical oral health education plus practical skills training) for nursing staff and/or residents vs (Optimised) usual care

Oral health-related attitude of nursing staff · Nursing home nursing staff (approximately 95% female in the two contributing studies)

Educational intervention with information and practical components… showed no clear difference in oral health-related attitude of nursing staff compared with (Optimised) usual care; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Educational intervention with information and practical components (theoretical oral health education plus practical skills training) for nursing staff and/or residents vs (Optimised) usual care

Oral health-related knowledge of nursing staff · Nursing home nursing staff (approximately 95% female in the two contributing studies)

Educational intervention with information and practical components… showed no clear difference in oral health-related knowledge of nursing staff compared with (Optimised) usual care; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Educational intervention with information and practical components (theoretical oral health education plus practical skills training) for nursing staff and/or residents vs (Optimised) usual care

Incidence of respiratory diseases and pneumonia · Nursing home residents (mean age 78.3 to 86.0 years; more than 66% women; 62.1% to 87.3% with dental prostheses)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Educational intervention with information and practical components (theoretical oral health education plus practical skills training) for nursing staff and/or residents vs (Optimised) usual care

Oral health · Nursing home residents (mean age 78.3 to 86.0 years; more than 66% women; 62.1% to 87.3% with dental prostheses)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Educational intervention with information and practical components (theoretical oral health education plus practical skills training) for nursing staff and/or residents vs (Optimised) usual care

Adverse effects of the interventions · Nursing home residents (mean age 78.3 to 86.0 years; more than 66% women; 62.1% to 87.3% with dental prostheses)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Educational intervention with information and practical components (theoretical oral health education plus practical skills training) for nursing staff and/or residents vs (Optimised) usual care

Oral health-related behaviour of residents · Nursing home residents (mean age 78.3 to 86.0 years; more than 66% women; 62.1% to 87.3% with dental prostheses)
1 finding from 1 review

Educational intervention with information and practical components (theoretical oral health education plus practical skills training) for nursing staff and/or residents vs (Optimised) usual care

Denture-induced stomatitis · Nursing home residents (mean age 78.3 to 86.0 years; more than 66% women; 62.1% to 87.3% with dental prostheses)
1 finding from 1 review

Educational intervention with information and practical components (theoretical oral health education plus practical skills training) for nursing staff and/or residents vs (Optimised) usual care

Gingivitis · Nursing home residents (mean age 78.3 to 86.0 years; more than 66% women; 62.1% to 87.3% with dental prostheses)
1 finding from 1 review

Educational intervention with information and practical components (theoretical oral health education plus practical skills training) for nursing staff and/or residents vs (Optimised) usual care

Oral health-related quality of life · Nursing home residents (mean age 78.3 to 86.0 years; more than 66% women; 62.1% to 87.3% with dental prostheses)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Educational intervention with information and practical components (theoretical oral health education plus practical skills training) for nursing staff and/or residents vs (Optimised) usual care

Plaque · Nursing home residents (mean age 78.3 to 86.0 years; more than 66% women; 62.1% to 87.3% with dental prostheses)

Educational intervention with information and practical components… showed no clear difference in dental plaque compared with (Optimised) usual care (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Populations with a lower proportion of university-educated people (<33.78% with university level) vs Not applicable

Dental caries · Adult participants in 25 meta-regression studies

The Model 1 adjusted meta-regression coefficient for lower university education was -4.132903.

2 findings from 1 review

Community and caregiver oral health education plus media campaign vs Pre-intervention BBTD rate

Baby bottle tooth decay prevalence · Alaska Native and American Indian Head Start children

High-intensity community education was associated with a 33% reduction in BBTD prevalence, without a GRADE rating.

3 findings from 1 review

Community and caregiver oral health education plus media campaign vs Pre-intervention BBTD rate

Baby bottle tooth decay prevalence · Alaska Native Head Start children

The Alaska Native site had a 20% increase in BBTD prevalence, without a GRADE rating.

1 finding from 1 review

Traditional screening with motivation (oral health education and offer of free treatment) vs Traditional screening

Dental attendance · School children, primary and secondary schools in India

It is very uncertain whether traditional screening with motivation (oral health education and… changes dental attendance compared with traditional screening alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral health education only (verbal, written, or audio-visual education) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Oral-health-education-only interventions showed at most a marginal effect on tooth-level caries (dmft SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.21 to -0.00; 2 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral health education only (verbal, written, or audio-visual education) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience at the surface level (dmfs/defs) · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Oral-health-education-only interventions did not show a statistically significant effect on surface-level caries (dmfs SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.03; 2 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Sociodemographic / socioeconomic factors (single-parent family, low parental education, family income, socioeconomic status) vs Absence of the factor / reference socioeconomic category

Caries increment in permanent teeth · School children and adolescents (6-18 years) followed from primary dentition (baseline examination before 72 months of age)

Evidence on the association between sociodemographic/socioeconomic factors and permanent-teeth caries is weak and inconsistent (3 studies; could not be pooled; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Community and caregiver oral health education plus media campaign vs Pre-intervention baseline (and sites that discontinued the prevention program)

Reduction in prevalence of baby bottle tooth decay (BBTD) · Alaska Native and American Indian Head Start children

Community and caregiver oral health education was associated with a significant ~25% overall reduction in baby bottle tooth decay among Head Start children (certainty not graded).

1 finding from 1 review