evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

211 questions · 428 findings · 24 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 1 · 0.2%GRADE not reported 346 · 80.8%Very low 14 · 3.3%Low 24 · 5.6%Moderate 43 · 10%High 0 · 0%

Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, or flowable composite) placed under the restoration vs No cavity liner or a different liner material

Secondary prevention of caries · Patients with deep caries lesions in mature or immature permanent (posterior) teeth, with no symptoms or reversible pulpitis

Cavity liners may make little or no difference to secondary caries prevention (~100% prevention across groups; low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

No intervention (single-arm cohort estimates) vs No comparator

First dentine caries incidence rate per person-year at risk (D3) · Caries-free children and adolescents with permanent dentition

Sánchez-Pérez et al. 2010 reported an incidence rate of 0.07 per person-year at risk.

16 findings from 1 review
Show 13 more findings

Enamel caries quantification (DeS/DeT within total D(M)FS/D(M)FT) vs None (descriptive prevalence review; subgroup analyses by urban/rural status, country and year)

Enamel caries proportion · European adolescents aged 12–19 years

Enamel caries made up about half of total caries experience (pooled proportion 0.50, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.65; 7 studies; higher in 12–15 than 16–19-year-olds; not GRADE-rated).

3 findings from 1 review

Caries experience measurement (mean D(M)FS, enamel lesions included) vs None (descriptive prevalence review; subgroup analyses by urban/rural status, country and year)

Dental caries · European adolescents aged 12–19 years

Mean caries experience (DMFS) in subgroup 'Examination type: full-mouth' was 6.56 (95% CI 4.55 to 9.47; 12 studies).

11 findings from 1 review
Show 8 more findings

Caries distribution assessment (individual, tooth and surface levels) vs None (descriptive prevalence review; subgroup analyses by urban/rural status, country and year)

Caries distribution (individual/tooth/surface level) · European adolescents aged 12–19 years

Caries distribution was skewed at individual, tooth and surface levels and too heterogeneous to meta-analyze (narrative synthesis of 11 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Caries assessment at enamel threshold vs None (descriptive prevalence review; subgroup analyses by urban/rural status, country and year)

Dental caries prevalence · European adolescents aged 12–19 years

Enamel-threshold caries prevalence in subgroup 'Region: non-Scandinavian' was 0.74 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.96; 11 studies).

11 findings from 1 review
Show 8 more findings

Selective caries removal (SCR) + composite resin vs Complete caries removal (CCR) + composite resin

Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with deep dentine caries in primary molars restored with composite resin (indirect pulp treatment; pulpotomy only if pulp exposed…

Complete caries removal with composite resin had an annual failure rate of 6.8% in primary molars (single high-risk-of-bias RCT; low quality of evidence; not GRADE-rated).

2 findings from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride twice annually vs Other network treatments

Caries lesion arrestment · Primary teeth with dentin caries lesions on occlusal and smooth surfaces

Silver diamine fluoride twice annually ranked first for caries lesion arrestment in the occlusal- and smooth-surface network (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review