evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

98 questions · 116 findings · 12 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 1 · 0.9%GRADE not reported 104 · 89.7%Very low 0 · 0%Low 2 · 1.7%Moderate 9 · 7.8%High 0 · 0%

38% SDF every 12 months vs water every 12 months

new carious lesions or fillings at fissure-site level · children with caries in permanent molars

SDF had a 52% preventative fraction at fissure-site level; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF one-time application without brushing programme vs no treatment without brushing programme

new carious lesions or fillings · Children with dental caries in permanent (first) molars

The review reported no significant result for SDF; no effect estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF (one-time application) vs Information unavailable

New coronal carious lesions or fillings on permanent (first) molars (caries prevention) · Children with dental caries in permanent (first) molars

One-time 38% SDF gave a 57% prevented fraction for caries in children's permanent first molars (single study; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

OHI + 38% SDF (applied every 12 months) vs oral health instruction plus water

new root-surface carious lesions or restorations · community-dwelling older adults with root caries

SDF had a 28% preventative fraction at 24 months; no pooled estimate or GRADE rating was reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Prior SDF application without a rinsing step vs No prior SDF application (untreated dentin control)

Immediate bond strength (MPa) · Glass-ionomer cement bonded to caries-affected dentin (in vitro)

SDF pretreatment without a rinsing step does not affect glass-ionomer cement bond strength to caries-affected dentin (MD 0.26 MPa, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.82; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Prior SDF application without a rinsing step vs No prior SDF application (untreated dentin control)

Immediate bond strength (MPa) · Dental adhesives bonded to sound dentin (in vitro)

Prior SDF without a rinsing step significantly reduces adhesive bond strength to sound dentin (MD 17.52 MPa favoring untreated dentin, 95% CI 5.81 to 29.22; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Atraumatic restorative treatment vs placebo

Oral health-related quality of life · Children with dental caries

ART and placebo did not differ for oral health-related quality of life, based on an indirect network estimate with no direct trials (MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.38; ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review

Prior SDF application with a rinsing step vs No prior SDF application (untreated dentin control)

Immediate bond strength (MPa) · Glass-ionomer cement bonded to sound dentin (in vitro)

SDF pretreatment with a rinsing step does not affect glass-ionomer cement bond strength to sound dentin (MD -1.11 MPa, 95% CI -3.47 to 1.25; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

SDF applied biannually (every 6 months) vs Other non/minimally-invasive treatment (ART or 5% NaF varnish)

Caries arrest · Children (age 1-10 years) with active cavitated dentin caries lesions in primary molars

Biannual SDF application significantly arrested caries (pooled ES 0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.60; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Prior SDF application with a rinsing step vs No prior SDF application (untreated dentin control)

Immediate bond strength (MPa) · Glass-ionomer cement bonded to caries-affected dentin (in vitro)

SDF pretreatment with a rinsing step does not affect glass-ionomer cement bond strength to caries-affected dentin (MD -0.36 MPa, 95% CI -1.07 to 0.35; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Prior SDF application without a rinsing step vs No prior SDF application (untreated dentin control)

Immediate bond strength (MPa) · Glass-ionomer cement bonded to sound dentin (in vitro)

SDF pretreatment without a rinsing step does not affect glass-ionomer cement bond strength to sound dentin (MD 0.26 MPa, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.73; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Prior SDF application with a rinsing step vs No prior SDF application (untreated dentin control)

Immediate bond strength (MPa) · Dental adhesives bonded to sound dentin (in vitro)

A rinsing step after SDF eliminates the negative effect on adhesive bond strength to sound dentin (MD 7.11 MPa, 95% CI -0.57 to 14.79, non-significant; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

38% SDF (applied every 6 or 12 months) vs 12% SDF solution (applied annually)

Caries arrest · Children (age 1-10 years) with active cavitated dentin caries lesions in primary molars

38% SDF arrested more caries than 12% SDF (pooled ES 0.37, 95% CI 0.27-0.47; single study; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Prior SDF application with a rinsing step vs No prior SDF application (untreated dentin control)

Immediate bond strength (MPa) · Dental adhesives bonded to caries-affected dentin (in vitro)

Prior SDF followed by a rinsing step significantly increases adhesive bond strength to caries-affected dentin (MD -4.79 MPa favoring SDF, 95% CI -9.19 to -0.40; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Prior SDF application without a rinsing step vs No prior SDF application (untreated dentin control)

Immediate bond strength (MPa) · Dental adhesives bonded to caries-affected dentin (in vitro)

Only one study assessed SDF without a rinsing step on adhesive bonding to caries-affected dentin (Kucukyilmaz 2016, which reported impaired bond strength); no meta-analysis was possible, so no pooled estimate is available.

1 finding from 1 review