Plaque control · Children or adolescents
One RCT reported superior plaque control with a gamified mobile health app versus a conventional method; no effect estimate or GRADE assessment was reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Long-term behavior change and overall oral health outcomes · Children or adolescents
Digital gamified interventions appear more effective than non-digital alternatives for long-term behavior change and oral health outcomes, but the evidence is narrative and ungraded.
1 finding from 1 review
Regular use rate · Children or adolescents
One RCT reported a 72.4% regular-use rate with a gamified mobile health app versus 48.3% with a nongamified intervention; no GRADE assessment was reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Regular use rate 72.4% (gamified mobile app) vs 48.3% (nongamified)
1 study · In one study, the regular use rate was significantly higher (72.4%) in the gamified mobile health app group than in the nongamified intervention group (48.3%). participants
GRADE not reported
Oral health knowledge (1-9 scale) · Children or adolescents
Gamified interventions appear to improve children's oral health knowledge compared with conventional education, but the evidence is narrative and ungraded.
1 finding from 1 review
Oral hygiene behavior (brushing habits, preventive dental visits, dietary choices) · Children or adolescents
Gamified interventions appear to improve oral hygiene behaviors (brushing habits, preventive dental visits) in children, but the evidence is narrative and ungraded.
1 finding from 1 review
Food choice · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)
In crossover studies with binary outcomes, food marketing had no clear association with food choice (OR 3.45, 95% CI 0.97 to 12.43; ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
OR 3.45 [0.97, 12.43]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Food purchasing · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)
Across five studies, 40% showed any association of potential public health harm for food purchasing (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)
Across two studies, 50% showed any association of potential public health harm for dental caries (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Food preference · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)
In crossover studies with binary outcomes, food marketing increased food preference (OR 3.49, 95% CI 2.03 to 6.22; ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
OR 3.49 [2.03, 6.22]
4 studies
GRADE not reported
Tooth decay-free children · Alaska children aged 5 to 18 years
The robust prevention PDHA model was projected to yield more than 50% tooth decay-free children versus 8% with other PDHA models, without a GRADE rating.
1 finding from 1 review
Caregiver satisfaction · Caregivers of Alaska Native children aged 6 to 17 years
More than 90% of caregivers reported being usually or always satisfied with DHAT care, without a GRADE rating.
1 finding from 1 review
Dental caries · Alaska children below age 5 years
The PDHA program was projected to reduce mean DMFT in children below age 5 from 7.4 to 4.9, without a GRADE rating.
1 finding from 1 review
Mean DMFT 7.4 to 4.9
1 study
GRADE not reported
Significant caries index · Alaska children aged 12 years
The PDHA program was projected to reduce the SiC index 70% from 10.5 to 3.3 for 12-year-olds, without a GRADE rating.
1 finding from 1 review
Negative oral-health impact on daily performance (OIDP or Child-OIDP) · Adolescents (10-19 years)
In the Child-OIDP subgroup, dental caries is associated with a worse oral-health impact: PR 1.66 (95% CI 1.19 to 2.31) from 6 studies (I2=96%); ungraded, and not statistically different from the OIDP subgroup (p=0.96).
5 findings from 1 review
Impact of dental caries on the quality of life of adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomesCross-sectional (concurrent exposure and outcome); oral impacts recalled over the prior 6 months · School-based (17/20 studies), plus household and secondary-data surveys; low-, middle- and high-income countries (Brazil, Thailand, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Zambia, Iran, Serbia, Nepal, India, South Africa, China) · Instrument subgroup: Child-OIDP
PR 1.66 [1.19, 2.31]
6 studies
GRADE not reported
Impact of dental caries on the quality of life of adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomesCross-sectional (concurrent exposure and outcome); oral impacts recalled over the prior 6 months · School-based (17/20 studies), plus household and secondary-data surveys; low-, middle- and high-income countries (Brazil, Thailand, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Zambia, Iran, Serbia, Nepal, India, South Africa, China) · Instrument subgroup: OIDP (all 3 studies)
PR 1.68 [0.89, 3.17]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Impact of dental caries on the quality of life of adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomesCross-sectional (concurrent exposure and outcome); oral impacts recalled over the prior 6 months · School-based (17/20 studies), plus household and secondary-data surveys; low-, middle- and high-income countries (Brazil, Thailand, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Zambia, Iran, Serbia, Nepal, India, South Africa, China) · Instrument subgroup: OIDP, sensitivity analysis excluding Krisdapong et al.
PR 1.21 [1.15, 1.28]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Show 2 more findings
Impact of dental caries on the quality of life of adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomesCross-sectional (concurrent exposure and outcome); oral impacts recalled over the prior 6 months · School-based (17/20 studies), plus household and secondary-data surveys; low-, middle- and high-income countries (Brazil, Thailand, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Zambia, Iran, Serbia, Nepal, India, South Africa, China) · Overall (all meta-analyzed studies pooled; both instruments and both caries definitions)
PR 1.52 [1.15, 2.01]
9 studies
GRADE not reported
Impact of dental caries on the quality of life of adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomesCross-sectional (concurrent exposure and outcome); oral impacts recalled over the prior 6 months · School-based (17/20 studies), plus household and secondary-data surveys; low-, middle- and high-income countries (Brazil, Thailand, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Zambia, Iran, Serbia, Nepal, India, South Africa, China) · Caries-definition subgroup: presence of dental caries
PR 1.19 [0.77, 1.84]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Oral health-related quality of life · people aged 60 years and older living in the community
No statistically significant difference in OHRQoL was reported by edentulism prevalence.
1 finding from 1 review
Occlusion · Children receiving dental restorations (aged 4-11 years; primary teeth; Class I/II/V cavities)
Occlusion was assessed in a single trial and was not pooled or GRADE-rated (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Oral health-related quality of life · people aged 60 years and older living in the community
No statistically significant difference in OHRQoL was reported by edentulism prevalence.
1 finding from 1 review
Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Adults aged 18 years or older with mature permanent teeth and carious pulp exposure
The three-study meta-analysis found no significant difference between full and partial pulpotomy after 1 year.
1 finding from 1 review
Gingival index (GI) · Individuals assessed for periodontal health (mainly children and adolescents, age >2 years)
Persons with orofacial cleft have a higher gingival index than healthy controls (MD 0.15, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.19; low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Adequate marginal adaptation · Children receiving dental restorations (aged 4-11 years; primary teeth; Class I/II/V cavities)
No significant difference between IRR and CR in marginal adaptation (high certainty).
1 finding from 1 review