Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,587 questions · 5,761 findings · 495 reviews

No studies found 1,011 · 17.5%GRADE not reported 1,797 · 31.2%Very low 1,100 · 19.1%Low 1,052 · 18.3%Moderate 649 · 11.3%High 152 · 2.6%

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

Summary of findings table ‐ Combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation vs mechanical bowel preparation alone

All‐cause mortality · Patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery

Summary of findings table ‐ Combined mechanical and oral antibiotic… showed no clear difference in mortality compared with mechanical bowel preparation alone (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation vs mechanical bowel preparation alone

Postoperative ileus · Patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery

Summary of findings table ‐ Combined mechanical and oral antibiotic… showed no clear difference in incidence of postoperative ileus compared with mechanical bowel preparation alone (low certainty).

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

Non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP) status and its oral microbiota (exposure/grouping) vs Children and adolescents aged 0-18 years without CLP (controls)

Dental caries · Children and adolescents aged 0-18 years with non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP)

Pooling 3 studies, children/adolescents with CLP were about 2.03 times more likely to have dental caries than non-CLP controls (p<0.005; low heterogeneity), though most included studies were at high risk of bias; the evidence is ungraded.

1 finding from 1 review

Non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP) status and its oral microbiota (exposure/grouping) vs Children and adolescents aged 0-18 years without CLP (controls)

Lactobacillus spp. salivary/plaque counts (cariogenic microbiota) · Children and adolescents aged 0-18 years with non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP)

A meta-analysis found no significant difference in mean Lactobacillus spp. levels between children with and without CLP, with high heterogeneity; the evidence is ungraded.

1 finding from 1 review

Non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP) status and its oral microbiota (exposure/grouping) vs Children and adolescents aged 0-18 years without CLP (controls)

Streptococcus mutans count · Children and adolescents aged 0-18 years with non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP)

A meta-analysis of 2 studies found no difference in mean Streptococcus mutans levels between children with and without CLP, with very high heterogeneity; the evidence is ungraded.

1 finding from 1 review

Non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP) status and its oral microbiota (exposure/grouping) vs Children and adolescents aged 0-18 years without CLP (controls)

Periodontal conditions (gingival inflammation, bleeding on probing, probing depth, clinical attachment loss) · Children and adolescents aged 0-18 years with non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP)

Narrative synthesis of 6 studies suggests children/adolescents with CLP have poorer periodontal status (higher gingival and plaque indices, deeper probing, more bleeding and attachment loss) and harbor periodontopathogens; no pooled estimate and the evidence is ungraded.

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

Oral olesoxime vs placebo

Change in disability score · non‐ambulatory children and adolescents with SMA types II and III
4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

Oral olesoxime vs placebo

Adverse events related to treatment · non‐ambulatory children and adolescents with SMA types II and III

Oral olesoxime probably leads to lower adverse events related to treatment compared with placebo (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral magnesium vs placebo/no treatment

Composite outcome: symptoms of leg cramps (intensity and frequency) Complete recovery: no leg cramps after treatment · treating leg cramps in pregnancy

It is very uncertain whether oral magnesium changes composite outcome: symptoms of leg cramps (intensity and frequency)… compared with placebo/no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review