Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,320 questions · 4,561 findings · 388 reviews

No studies found 1,138 · 25%GRADE not reported 886 · 19.4%Very low 1,014 · 22.2%Low 849 · 18.6%Moderate 543 · 11.9%High 131 · 2.9%

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) vs Modified tandem appliance

Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) led to higher overjet compared with modified tandem appliance; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask vs no intervention

Adverse effects (temporomandibular joint signs and symptoms) · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)
1 finding from 1 review

Facemask after Alt-RAMEC vs Facemask started simultaneously with Alt-RAMEC

Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Facemask after Alt-RAMEC showed no clear difference in overjet compared with facemask started simultaneously with Alt-RAMEC; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic removable traction appliance (ORTA) vs no intervention

ANB · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Orthodontic removable traction appliance (ORTA) led to higher ANB compared with untreated control (no treatment); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Advice about a healthy diet (including breastfeeding promotion and sugar avoidance) and feeding practices (e.g. relating to bottle-feeding and sleep) for infants and young children vs usual care

Child oral health behaviours · For interventions, pregnant women, mothers or other caregivers of infants in the first year of life; for outcomes, children up to 6 years…
1 finding from 1 review

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) vs Mini maxillary protractor

ANB · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) led to lower ANB compared with mini maxillary protractor; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Advice about a healthy diet (including breastfeeding promotion and sugar avoidance) and feeding practices (e.g. relating to bottle-feeding and sleep) for infants and young children vs usual care

Adverse events for mother or child · For interventions, pregnant women, mothers or other caregivers of infants in the first year of life; for outcomes, children up to 6 years…
1 finding from 1 review

Prophylaxis (teeth cleaning) and CHX or iodine-NaF solution application in the dentition of women (mothers) vs placebo

Caries presence in primary teeth · For interventions, pregnant women and mothers of infants in the first year of life; for outcomes, children up to 6 years of age

It is very uncertain whether prophylaxis (teeth cleaning) and CHX or iodine-NaF solution… changes caries presence in primary teeth compared with placebo (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylaxis (teeth cleaning) and CHX or iodine-NaF solution application in the dentition of women (mothers) vs placebo

Child microbiological presence (mutans streptococci acquisition) · For interventions, pregnant women and mothers of infants in the first year of life; for outcomes, children up to 6 years of age
1 finding from 1 review

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) vs Reverse Twin Block with lip pads and rapid maxillary expander (RME)

Wits appraisal · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Facemask with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) led to lower wits appraisal compared with reverse Twin Block with lip pads and rapid maxillary expander (RME); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask (RME) or modified facemask vs Surgically-anchored appliance (miniscrews or miniplates)

ANB · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Facemask (RME) or modified facemask showed no clear difference in ANB compared with surgically-anchored appliance (miniscrews or miniplates) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Health service and/or policy intervention designed to modify access to oral health information or services for pregnant women, new mothers or other primary caregivers vs Standard care (or any comparator)

Outcome not reported · For interventions, pregnant women, mothers or other caregivers of infants in the first year of life; for outcomes, children up to 6 years…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Hybrid Hyrax (RME) with miniscrews and Class III elastics vs Conventional Hyrax (RME) with miniscrews and Class III elastics

Wits appraisal · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Hybrid Hyrax (RME) with miniscrews and Class III elastics showed no clear difference in wits appraisal compared with conventional Hyrax (RME) with miniscrews and Class III elastics; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylaxis (teeth cleaning) and CHX or iodine-NaF solution application in the dentition of women (mothers) vs placebo

Mother caries (DMFT increment) · For interventions, pregnant women and mothers of infants in the first year of life; for outcomes, children up to 6 years of age

Prophylaxis (teeth cleaning) and CHX or iodine-NaF solution… showed no clear difference in mother caries (DMFT increment) compared with placebo; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask (with frame internal fixation) vs Frankel III functional appliance

ANB · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Facemask (with frame internal fixation) showed no clear difference in ANB compared with frankel III functional appliance; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask (RME) or modified facemask vs Other non-surgical orthodontic treatments (mini maxillary protractor, Pushing Splints, modified tandem, Reverse Forsus, reverse Twin Block, reverse chin cup, tongue appliance, Frankel III)

Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

It is very uncertain whether facemask (RME) or modified facemask changes overjet compared with other non-surgical orthodontic treatments (mini maxillary… (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Bone-anchored intermaxillary traction (BAIMT) vs Removable mandibular retractor (RMR)

ANB · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Bone-anchored intermaxillary traction (BAIMT) led to higher ANB compared with removable mandibular retractor (RMR); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Hybrid Hyrax (RME) with miniscrews and Class III elastics vs Conventional Hyrax (RME) with miniscrews and Class III elastics

ANB · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Hybrid Hyrax (RME) with miniscrews and Class III elastics showed no clear difference in ANB compared with conventional Hyrax (RME) with miniscrews and Class III elastics; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review