evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

310 questions · 590 findings · 34 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 12 · 2%GRADE not reported 470 · 79.7%Very low 23 · 3.9%Low 34 · 5.8%Moderate 51 · 8.6%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

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

Sensitivity · 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 for the detection of dental caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    CarieScan Pro (3 studies, 244 tooth surfaces): sensitivity ranged from 0.55 to 0.91. No evidence of a difference in accuracy by device type (Chi2=0.05, df=1, P=0.82).
    3 studies
    GRADE not reported

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

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

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

Sensitivity · 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 for the detection of dental caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    ECM (4 studies, 475 tooth surfaces): sensitivity ranged from 0.61 to 0.98 (0.61-0.65 in three studies; 0.98 in the most recent ECM IV study). No evidence of a difference in accuracy by device type (Chi2=0.05, df=1,…
    4 studies
    GRADE not reported

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)

Sensitivity · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or extracted teeth of…
2 findings 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) · Permanent dentition
    Permanent dentition (4 studies): sensitivity ranged from 0.55 to 0.65.
    4 studies
    GRADE not reported
  • 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) · Primary dentition
    Primary dentition (3 studies): sensitivity ranged from 0.91 to 0.93. No evidence of a difference in accuracy by dentition (removing accuracy covariate: Chi2=3.15, df=1, P=0.08).
    3 studies
    GRADE not reported

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)

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