Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

471 questions · 539 findings · 69 reviews

No studies found 154 · 28.6%GRADE not reported 121 · 22.4%Very low 117 · 21.7%Low 100 · 18.6%Moderate 43 · 8%High 4 · 0.7%

Oral health education only (verbal, written, or audio-visual education) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Oral-health-education-only interventions showed at most a marginal effect on tooth-level caries (dmft SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.21 to -0.00; 2 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral health education only (verbal, written, or audio-visual education) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience at the surface level (dmfs/defs) · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Oral-health-education-only interventions did not show a statistically significant effect on surface-level caries (dmfs SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.03; 2 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Community and caregiver oral health education plus media campaign vs Pre-intervention baseline (and sites that discontinued the prevention program)

Reduction in prevalence of baby bottle tooth decay (BBTD) · Alaska Native and American Indian Head Start children

Community and caregiver oral health education was associated with a significant ~25% overall reduction in baby bottle tooth decay among Head Start children (certainty not graded).

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

Plaque index (PI) / oral hygiene · Primary school children (aged 3-16 years) attending primary school in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

School-based interventions may reduce dental plaque scores (SMD -0.32, favouring intervention), but the certainty of evidence is very low.

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

Oral hygiene measured by mean gingival scores · Primary school children (aged 3-16 years) attending primary school in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

The effect of school-based interventions on gingival scores is uncertain and not statistically significant (SMD 0.12; 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 · Primary school children (aged 3-16 years) attending primary school in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

Among children aged 6-8 years, DMFT scores were significantly reduced (SMD -0.11); subgroup not separately GRADE-rated.

8 findings from 1 review
Show 5 more findings

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

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

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

Caries increment, tooth index D(M)FT · Primary school children (aged 3-16 years) attending primary school in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

Among children aged 5-8 years, net increment in DMFT was not significantly reduced (SMD -0.36); no significant subgroup difference by age.

3 findings from 1 review

Comprehensive oral health intervention (oral health education plus additional support: motivational interviewing, toothbrush/toothpaste provision, community engagement, and/or fluoride varnish/sealant application) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience at the surface level (dmfs/defs) · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Comprehensive interventions produced a small, statistically significant reduction in surface-level caries (dmfs SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.02; 10 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Comprehensive oral health intervention (oral health education plus additional support: motivational interviewing, toothbrush/toothpaste provision, community engagement, and/or fluoride varnish/sealant application) delivered by non-dental health workers vs control (no intervention/usual care/isotonic exercise)

Caries experience · Children (mean age newborn to ~5.2 years) and their parents/carers

Comprehensive interventions produced a statistically significant reduction in tooth-level caries (dmft SMD -0.47, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.10; 4 studies; not GRADE-rated), though heterogeneity was very high.

1 finding from 1 review

Psychological interventions (including health education) vs usual care

Proportion of participants returning to work in the short term (up to 6 months) · patients with coronary heart disease

It is very uncertain whether psychological interventions (including health education) changes proportion of participants returning to work in the short term (up… compared with usual care (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Psychological interventions (including health education) vs usual care

Proportion of participants returning to work in the medium term (6 months ‐ 1 year) · patients with coronary heart disease

It is very uncertain whether psychological interventions (including health education) changes proportion of participants returning to work in the medium term (6… compared with usual care (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Psychological interventions (including health education) vs usual care

Return to work · patients with coronary heart disease

Psychological interventions (including health education) showed no clear difference in proportion of participants at work in the long term (> 1 to < 5 years) compared with usual care (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Summary of findings: multimedia education vs education by a health professional

Health outcomes Bronchial obstruction (FEV), higher score indicates less bronchial obstruction. Theoretical maximum scores were 2.72 for the multimedia and 3.14 for the control group. · patients taking prescribed and over‐the‐counter medications or their carers
1 finding from 1 review