What do systematic reviews say?

Universal screening vs case finding

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Screening and subsequent management for thyroid dysfunction pre‐pregnancy and during pregnancy for improving maternal… 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Universal screening vs case finding

Universal screening showed no clear difference in preterm birth compared with case finding (high certainty).

• Screening and subsequent management for thyroid dysfunction pre‐pregnancy and during pregnancy for improving maternal… 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.99 [0.8, 1.24]
  1 study · 4516 participants
  High

Universal screening vs case finding

Universal screening showed no clear difference in miscarriage compared with case finding (moderate certainty).

• Screening and subsequent management for thyroid dysfunction pre‐pregnancy and during pregnancy for improving maternal… 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.9 [0.68, 1.19]
  1 study · 4516 participants
  Moderate

Universal screening vs case finding

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Screening and subsequent management for thyroid dysfunction pre‐pregnancy and during pregnancy for improving maternal… 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Universal screening vs case finding

Universal screening showed no clear difference in fetal and neonatal death compared with case finding (moderate certainty).

• Screening and subsequent management for thyroid dysfunction pre‐pregnancy and during pregnancy for improving maternal… 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.92 [0.42, 2.02]
  1 study · 4516 participants
  Moderate

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Proportion of children with treated/untreated caries: Not reported (Summary of findings 1).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No studies measured developmental defects of enamel (by any validated index).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Milsom 2006 reported the prevalence of trauma to the permanent incisor teeth as a dichotomous outcome (reduction from baseline yes/no); we were unable to include this data in a meta-analysis.
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes

  3 to 4 months
  Data not pooled; 6281 participants (4 RCTs); Very low. There was substantial heterogeneity, in part due to study design (3 cluster-RCTs and 1 individually randomised trial). We are unable to draw conclusions about this…
  4 studies · 6281 participants
  Very low

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No studies measured gingivitis (by any validated index).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No studies measured malocclusion or orthodontic treatment needs (by any validated index).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Proportion of children with other treated/untreated oral health need: Not reported (Summary of findings 1).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Adverse events: Not reported (Summary of findings 1).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Milsom 2006 measured prevalence of dental caries as mean number of teeth with active caries in primary teeth (dt) and permanent teeth (DT); post-intervention changes from baseline were not significant, and the authors…
  1 study · 16684 participants
  GRADE not reported

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
  As none of the studies reported cost-effectiveness, we could not assess the cost-benefit aspect of school dental screening.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Screening hysteroscopy vs no hysteroscopy

It is very uncertain whether screening hysteroscopy changes live birth compared with no hysteroscopy (very low certainty).

• Screening hysteroscopy in subfertile women and women undergoing assisted reproduction 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 4.3 [2.29, 8.07]
  1 study · 200 participants
  Very low

Screening hysteroscopy vs no hysteroscopy

• Screening hysteroscopy in subfertile women and women undergoing assisted reproduction 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 1 participants
  Very low

Screening hysteroscopy vs no hysteroscopy

It is very uncertain whether screening hysteroscopy changes clinical pregnancy compared with no hysteroscopy (very low certainty).

• Screening hysteroscopy in subfertile women and women undergoing assisted reproduction 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 3.8 [2.31, 6.24]
  1 study · 200 participants
  Very low

Screening hysteroscopy vs no hysteroscopy

It is very uncertain whether screening hysteroscopy changes miscarriage compared with no hysteroscopy (very low certainty).

• Screening hysteroscopy in subfertile women and women undergoing assisted reproduction 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.8 [1.05, 7.48]
  1 study · 200 participants
  Very low

Screening hysteroscopy vs no hysteroscopy

Screening hysteroscopy may leads to higher live birth compared with no hysteroscopy (low certainty).

• Screening hysteroscopy in subfertile women and women undergoing assisted reproduction 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.26 [1.11, 1.43]
  6 studies · 2745 participants
  Low