Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

1,741 questions · 1,821 findings · 207 reviews

No studies found 297 · 16.3%GRADE not reported 191 · 10.5%Very low 333 · 18.3%Low 466 · 25.6%Moderate 414 · 22.7%High 120 · 6.6%

Powered toothbrush, counter oscillation action vs Circular powered toothbrush

Gingivitis (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
  • Different powered toothbrushes for plaque control and gingival health 2010 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Short term (1-3 months) · Adolescents
    Trimpeneers 1997 reported a significant difference in favour of the counter oscillation brush for gingival index at 2 months over a circular mode of action brush; data were unsuitable for meta-analysis.
    1 study · 36 participants
    GRADE not reported

Powered toothbrush, side-to-side action vs Counter oscillation powered toothbrush

Gingivitis (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)

Side to side action powered toothbrush showed no clear difference in gingivitis (level reduction) compared with counter oscillation powered toothbrush; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Multidimensional powered toothbrush vs Side to side action powered toothbrush

Staining · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review

Powered toothbrush, rotation oscillation action vs Circular powered toothbrush

Plaque (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)

Rotation oscillation powered toothbrush showed no clear difference in plaque (level reduction) compared with circular powered toothbrush; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Powered toothbrush, side-to-side action vs Circular powered toothbrush

Gingivitis (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)

Side to side action powered toothbrush led to higher gingivitis (level reduction) compared with circular powered toothbrush; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Powered toothbrush, rotation oscillation action vs Circular powered toothbrush

Gingivitis (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)

Rotation oscillation powered toothbrush led to higher gingivitis (level reduction) compared with circular powered toothbrush; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Powered toothbrush, side-to-side action vs Circular powered toothbrush

Plaque (level reduction) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
  • Different powered toothbrushes for plaque control and gingival health 2010 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Short term (1-3 months)
    Analysis 3.1 Plaque < 3 months (Turesky): 1 trial (Yankell 1997), 64 participants; totals not selected; no significant difference between side to side and circular for plaque in the short term.
    1 study · 64 participants
    GRADE not reported

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Quality of life (validated questionnaire) · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Instrumental assessment: nasalance score (nasometry and pressure-flow measure) · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Self-esteem (Piers-Harris self-concept scale) · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Instrumental assessment: velopharyngeal complete closure and gap size (videonasopharyngoscopy and multiview videofluoroscopy) · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate
1 finding from 1 review
  • Interventions for the management of submucous cleft palate 2008 · Cochrane All outcomes
    3 months post-operatively
    Complete closure occurred in 32 (86%) of the participants in group 1 (MIPP) and in 31 (89%) in group 2, P > 0.05. After eliminating the nine patients with residual velopharyngeal insufficiency, the post-operative gap…
    1 study · 72 participants
    GRADE not reported

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Adverse effect: failure of muscle fusion in the region of the cleft after surgery · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate
1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Adverse effect: unacceptable nasal resonance after repair · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Adverse effect: obstructive sleep apnoea or airway compromise · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate
1 finding from 1 review

Anticipated high responders: higher vs lower dose of FSH

IU vs 100 IU · women undergoing IVF/ICSI who are anticipated to have a hyper‐response to stimulation based on at least one ORT measure

Anticipated high responders: higher showed no clear difference in IU vs 100 IU compared with lower dose of FSH (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review