evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

1,692 questions · 2,586 findings · 180 reviews · Dental caries

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 194 · 7.5%GRADE not reported 1,937 · 74.9%Very low 248 · 9.6%Low 136 · 5.3%Moderate 52 · 2%High 19 · 0.7%

Electronic caries monitor (ECM) device (ECM II / ECM III / ECM IV) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Specificity · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or extracted teeth of…
1 finding from 1 review

Electrical conductance devices (electronic caries monitor (ECM) and/or CarieScan Pro), used as an adjunct to clinical oral examination vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic odds ratio (overall test accuracy) · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or extracted teeth of…
1 finding from 1 review

Fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI) vs Histological validation (serial sectioning, grinding, hemisection, or microradiography)

Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the caries detection level (D0 versus D1-D4) · Extracted human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars), occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces

In in vitro, fibre-optic transillumination pooled sensitivity was 0.97 (95% CI -0.92 to 0.99) for occlusal caries at the caries detection level; ungraded.

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)

Efficiency, costs or cost-effectiveness · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…
1 finding from 1 review

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) vs Digital radiographs (direct within-person / paired comparison); reference standard: histology

Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
2 findings from 1 review

Electrical conductance devices (electronic caries monitor (ECM) and/or CarieScan Pro), used as an adjunct to clinical oral examination vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual examination (with or without radiographs)

Outcome not reported · Teeth with previously applied restorations (secondary caries) or pit and fissure sealants; target condition = non-cavitated enamel caries.

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Electrical conductance for the detection of dental caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    No eligible studies. 'No included studies reported inclusion criteria of previously applied restorations or pit and fissure sealants' (a planned subgroup).
    0 studies
    No studies found

Visual examination (VE) vs Direct visual examination after tooth separation or bioptical cavity preparation

Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (dentin detection level) · Patients with permanent posterior teeth, proximal surfaces assessed clinically (in vivo)

Under in vivo conditions, visual examination had a pooled specificity of 0.76 (95% CI 0.11, 0.99) for proximal caries detection at the dentin detection level; ungraded.

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) vs Digital radiographs (direct within-person / paired comparison); reference standard: histology

Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
2 findings from 1 review

Transillumination/OCT device used as an adjunct to a conventional visual examination vs Reference standard: histology, or enhanced visual examination with or without radiographs (also operative excavation, tooth separation, or microcomputed tomography)

Outcome not reported · Children or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of having enamel caries (clinical/in vivo studies); extracted teeth of…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Analogue (conventional) radiographs vs Digital radiographs (direct within-person / paired comparison); reference standard: histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination

Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
2 findings from 1 review

CarieScan Pro device vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Specificity · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or extracted teeth of…
1 finding from 1 review

Prison-nursery setting / incarcerated-mother household (oral health status) vs Counterparts (community children)

Oral health status (caries, oral hygiene, treatment indices) · Preschool children of incarcerated mothers in UAE prison nurseries

One study found high caries (89.8%) and poor oral hygiene with low restorative care among preschool children of incarcerated mothers (narrative synthesis; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Other visual classification systems (unspecified or unique systems, e.g. Nyvad, Downer, Lussi, UniViSS) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Specificity for detection of enamel caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Gingivitis (assessed by gingival index or WHO criteria) vs None (descriptive prevalence review; subgroup analyses by urban/rural status, country and year)

Gingival health at 6 months · Children and adolescents in the United Arab Emirates (Sharjah)

Gingivitis and high plaque levels were common among UAE children and adolescents, more likely in females and older children (narrative synthesis; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Digital radiographs vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic accuracy on surfaces with pit and fissure sealants · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies) · Pit and fissure sealants
    Pre-specified heterogeneity investigation of surfaces with pit and fissure sealants: no study reported the inclusion of sealants that would allow evaluation of early caries lesions.
    0 studies
    No studies found

Near-infrared (NIR) transillumination vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review