Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

2,745 questions · 4,389 findings · 203 reviews · Oral Health

No studies found 39 · 0.9%GRADE not reported 3,844 · 87.6%Very low 198 · 4.5%Low 137 · 3.1%Moderate 134 · 3.1%High 37 · 0.8%

Primary school-based interventions (one or more of: school health policy, oral health education, healthy school environment, access to oral health services, community involvement) vs usual practice

Annual increment in DMFS (D3) · Primary school children (aged 3-16 years) attending primary school in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

Oral-health-education interventions significantly reduced net increment in DMFS (SMD -1.05); no significant subgroup difference vs other interventions (P=0.74).

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

Living with HIV and undergoing antiretroviral therapy (ART/HAART) vs Healthy HIV-negative controls

Recurrent oral ulcerations (WHO clinical stage 2) · Children or adolescents

CLWH on ART had significantly higher prevalence of recurrent oral ulcerations than healthy controls (pooled OR 6.83, 95% CI 1.18 to 39.53).

1 finding from 1 review

Bulk-fill composite resin with 15-second dentine etching vs Bulk-fill composite resin with 7-second dentine etching

Restoration failure · Children with carious primary teeth

No comparative effect estimate was reported; the 7-second etching arm had a lower tabulated failure rate.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Living with HIV and undergoing antiretroviral therapy (ART/HAART) vs Healthy HIV-negative controls

Periodontal disease (gingivitis/periodontitis) · Children or adolescents

CLWH on ART had significantly higher prevalence of periodontal disease than healthy controls (pooled OR 3.11, 95% CI 1.62 to 5.97; moderate heterogeneity).

1 finding from 1 review

Combined antiretroviral therapy (post-cART) vs Pre-cART (same children, before therapy)

Oral candidiasis prevalence · Children and adolescents (<18 years) living with HIV (CLWH)

Oral candidiasis prevalence fell significantly after cART compared with before cART in the same children (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Primary school-based interventions (one or more of: school health policy, oral health education, healthy school environment, access to oral health services, community involvement) vs usual practice

Dental caries prevalence measured by dmft or DMFT/S score greater than one · Primary school children (aged 3-16 years) attending primary school in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

School-based interventions may reduce the prevalence of dental caries (RR 0.70, favouring intervention), but the certainty of evidence is very low.

3 findings from 1 review

Socioeconomic status category vs Children without dental caries

Dental caries · Children (deciduous and/or permanent dentition) in low- and middle-income countries

High SES showed no significant association with dental caries (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.31; 5 studies; not GRADE-rated).

2 findings from 1 review

Pulpotomy with Biodentine vs Pulpotomy with calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2)

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Human permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis due to carious pulp exposure

Biodentine had a significantly higher pulpotomy success rate than calcium hydroxide (indirect comparison; numeric estimate not available); ungraded.

1 finding from 1 review

Sociodemographic / socioeconomic factors (single-parent family, low parental education, family income, socioeconomic status) vs Absence of the factor / reference socioeconomic category

Caries increment in permanent teeth · School children and adolescents (6-18 years) followed from primary dentition (baseline examination before 72 months of age)

Evidence on the association between sociodemographic/socioeconomic factors and permanent-teeth caries is weak and inconsistent (3 studies; could not be pooled; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

High-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (HVGIC) restoration (conventional restorative approach) vs Compomer, composite resin, or another HVGIC

Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with previously unrestored, vital carious lesions in primary teeth (no pulp therapy); aged 1.5-11 years

High-viscosity GIC had a wide annual failure rate (2.9-25.6%) and was outperformed by compomer/composite in some trials (3 RCTs); low quality of evidence (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) vs No cleft lip and/or palate (non-CL/P)

Care index (CI = f/[d+m+f]) in the primary dentition · Children in the primary dentition with non-syndromic cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) and comparable children without CL/P

The care index tended to be higher in children without CL/P (2 of 3 studies), suggesting more extraction-based caries management in children with CL/P; not pooled (narrative; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review
  • Caries in children with and without orofacial clefting: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2022 All outcomes
    Children with CL/P and comparable non-CL/P children across 12 countries (India, Brazil, China, Sweden, UK, USA, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Netherlands, Jordan, Thailand); studies published 1989-2021
    Two out of three studies for which the CI could be calculated (Nagappan 2019; Veiga 2016) showed a higher CI for non-CL/P children demonstrating a higher proportion of extraction-based treatment in CL/P children…
    3 studies
    GRADE not reported

Fluorescence-based devices vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Sensitivity for detection of enamel caries · Asymptomatic children or adults suspected of enamel caries (clinical studies); extracted teeth (in vitro studies)

Fluorescence-based devices had a summary sensitivity of 0.76 (95% CrI 0.68, 0.82) for detecting enamel caries; low certainty.

2 findings from 1 review