Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

1,970 questions · 2,433 findings · 231 reviews

No studies found 303 · 12.5%GRADE not reported 759 · 31.2%Very low 357 · 14.7%Low 476 · 19.6%Moderate 418 · 17.2%High 120 · 4.9%

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants vs Short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation

Augmentation procedure failure · Patients with missing teeth and an atrophic posterior maxilla, with residual bone height between 4 and 9 mm below the maxillary sinus
1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants vs Short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation

Implant failure · Patients with missing teeth and an atrophic posterior maxilla, with residual bone height between 4 and 9 mm below the maxillary sinus

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

One-stage crestal-approach sinus lift with autogenous bone and 8 mm implants vs Lateral-window sinus lift with 50% autogenous bone/50% Bio-Oss and implants at least 10 mm long

Partial graft loss · Patients with 3 to 6 mm of residual bone height at the sinus floor

One-stage crestal-approach sinus lift with autogenous bone and 8 mm… showed no clear difference in partial graft loss compared with lateral-window sinus lift with 50% autogenous bone/50% Bio-Oss and…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

One-stage lateral sinus lift with monocortical autogenous bone blocks (iliac crest) vs Two-stage lateral sinus lift with autogenous particulate bone (iliac crest)

Implant failure · Patients with 2 to 7 mm of residual alveolar bone height in the edentulous maxillary sinus floor

One-stage lateral sinus lift with monocortical autogenous bone… showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with two-stage lateral sinus lift with autogenous particulate bone (iliac…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Powered toothbrush, circular action vs Manual toothbrush

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

Powered toothbrush, circular action showed no clear difference in plaque score (1 to 3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Powered toothbrush, side-to-side action vs Manual toothbrush

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

Powered toothbrush, side-to-side action showed no clear difference in gingivitis score (>3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Powered toothbrush, ultrasonic action vs Manual toothbrush

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

Powered toothbrush, ultrasonic action led to lower gingivitis score (1 to 3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Powered toothbrush, unknown/other action vs Manual toothbrush

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

Powered toothbrush, counter oscillation action vs Manual toothbrush

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

Powered toothbrush, counter oscillation action showed no clear difference in gingivitis score (1 to 3 months) compared with manual toothbrush; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Powered toothbrush (any mode of action) vs Manual toothbrush

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

Powered toothbrush (any mode of action) probably leads to lower gingivitis score (1 to 3 months) compared with manual toothbrush (moderate certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Hand mallet (osteotomes) vs Electric mallet

Implant failure · Patients undergoing one-stage crestal maxillary sinus lift without bone grafts (baseline residual bone height about 6.5 mm)

Hand mallet (osteotomes) showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with electric mallet; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

One-stage crestal-approach sinus lift with autogenous bone and 8 mm implants vs Lateral-window sinus lift with 50% autogenous bone/50% Bio-Oss and implants at least 10 mm long

Prosthesis failure · Patients with 3 to 6 mm of residual bone height at the sinus floor

One-stage crestal-approach sinus lift with autogenous bone and 8 mm… showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with lateral-window sinus lift with 50% autogenous bone/50% Bio-Oss and…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Sinus lift with bone graft (granular Bio-Oss) vs Sinus lift without bone graft (Inion resorbable rigid barrier maintaining space / no bone)

Prosthesis failure · Patients with an atrophic maxillary sinus requiring augmentation (1 to 5 mm residual bone height)

Sinus lift with bone graft (granular Bio-Oss) showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with sinus lift without bone graft (Inion resorbable rigid barrier…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Powered toothbrush (any mode of action) vs Manual toothbrush

Adverse events (soft tissue trauma) · Individuals of any age with no reported disability that might affect toothbrushing (including people wearing orthodontic appliances)
1 finding from 1 review
  • SoF 'Adverse events' row (narrative): There was no apparent relationship between the use of powered toothbrushes and soft tissue trauma. In part this finding was due to the very small number of adverse events reported…
    40 studies
    GRADE not reported

Vitamin D vs placebo or no intervention

Cancer occurrence · healthy participants or recruited among the general population; individuals diagnosed with a specific disease in a stable phase or with…

Vitamin D showed no clear difference in cancer occurrence compared with placebo or no intervention (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Vitamin D vs placebo or no intervention

Cancer occurrence in trials using vitamin D₃ (cholecalciferol) · healthy participants or recruited among the general population; individuals diagnosed with a specific disease in a stable phase or with…

Vitamin D showed no clear difference in cancer occurrence in trials using vitamin D₃ (cholecalciferol) compared with placebo or no intervention (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Vitamin D vs placebo or no intervention

Cancer mortality in trials using vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) ( · healthy participants or recruited among the general population; individuals diagnosed with a specific disease in a stable phase or with…

Vitamin D may leads to lower cancer mortality in trials using vitamin D₃(cholecalciferol) compared with placebo or no intervention (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review