Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

2,087 questions · 2,360 findings · 390 reviews

No studies found 224 · 9.5%GRADE not reported 603 · 25.6%Very low 555 · 23.5%Low 548 · 23.2%Moderate 312 · 13.2%High 118 · 5%

Visual classification: ERK (Ekstrand-Ricketts-Kidd system) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Specificity for detection of enamel caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Visual or visual-tactile classification systems (any system: ICDAS, ERK, Nyvad, Downer, Lussi, UniViSS, or unspecified) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Diagnostic accuracy on surfaces with pit and fissure sealants · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Visual classification: ERK (Ekstrand-Ricketts-Kidd system) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Sensitivity for detection of enamel caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride varnish vs Fissure sealant (resin-based or glass ionomer)

Caries incidence of first permanent molars (FPMs) · Generally healthy children aged 6 to 9 years with at least one fully erupted first permanent molar with deep fissures or early enamel…

After excluding the high-risk-of-bias study (Bravo 1996), fluoride varnish and fissure sealant did not differ in caries incidence of FPMs and heterogeneity fell to 0% (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.22; 5 RCTs; ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review

Fluoride varnish vs Fissure sealant (resin-based or glass ionomer)

Caries incidence (proportion of enrolled children developing dentin caries, ICDAS 4-6) · Generally healthy children aged 6 to 9 years with at least one fully erupted first permanent molar with deep fissures or early enamel…

Fluoride varnish and fissure sealant did not differ significantly in the proportion of children developing caries at 2 to 3 years (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.09; 2 RCTs; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride varnish vs Fissure sealant (resin-based or glass ionomer)

Caries incidence of occlusal surfaces of first permanent molars · Generally healthy children aged 6 to 9 years with at least one fully erupted first permanent molar with deep fissures or early enamel…

After excluding Bravo 1996, occlusal caries incidence slightly favored fluoride varnish but was not significant, with heterogeneity falling to 0% (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.16; 3 RCTs; ungraded).

2 findings from 1 review

Tafamidis vs placebo

Number of participants experiencing at least one severe adverse event · people with early‐stage TTR‐FAP

It is very uncertain whether tafamidis changes number of participants experiencing at least one severe adverse event compared with placebo (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride varnish vs Fissure sealant (resin-based or glass ionomer)

Increment of occlusal DMFS (decayed, missing, filled surfaces) of FPMs · Generally healthy children aged 6 to 9 years with at least one fully erupted first permanent molar with deep fissures or early enamel…

Fluoride varnish and fissure sealant did not differ significantly in occlusal DMFS increment of FPMs (MD 0.13, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.34; 3 RCTs; ungraded).

2 findings from 1 review

Residence in weakly contaminated area (approx. 1-5 Ci/km2) vs Residence in non-contaminated (non-exposed) area (<1 Ci/km2)

Dental caries · Children aged 5-7 years (early school-age)

In early school-age children (5-7 y) from weakly contaminated areas, individual cross-sectional studies reported mostly higher but inconsistent DMFT/dmft in exposed vs non-exposed children; the review did not pool the data and drew no firm conclusion (ungraded).

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

CPP-ACP vs No active treatment (control)

Enamel surface microhardness · Extracted human teeth with early/artificial enamel lesions (in vitro)

In vitro, CPP-ACP increased Vickers microhardness versus control (SMD 1.19, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.66; ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review