evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

348 questions · 568 findings · 47 reviews · Dental caries

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 23 · 4%GRADE not reported 485 · 85.4%Very low 27 · 4.8%Low 31 · 5.5%Moderate 2 · 0.4%High 0 · 0%

All fluorescence-based devices (red, blue, and green fluorescence combined) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) by subgroup: High dentine-caries prevalence (>=35%) (detection of early enamel caries, D1 threshold) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

All fluorescence-based devices (red, blue, and green fluorescence combined) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) by subgroup: Primary dentition (detection of early enamel caries, D1 threshold) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

MidWest (DENTSPLY; red fluorescence, red/green light and sound signal) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) for detection of early enamel caries (D1 threshold) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Fluorescence devices for the detection of dental caries 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    Analysed as a separate index test (coupled forest plot and SROC plot, Figure 22 / Figure 23; Appendix 5); no summary DOR or sensitivity/specificity point reported numerically in the text. 4 datasets, 356 tooth sites.
    4 studies
    GRADE not reported

All fluorescence-based devices (red, blue, and green fluorescence combined) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) by subgroup: Multiple sites per tooth (detection of early enamel caries, D1 threshold) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

All fluorescence-based devices (red, blue, and green fluorescence combined) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) by subgroup: Smooth or secondary-caries surfaces (detection of early enamel caries, D1 threshold) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

All fluorescence-based devices (red, blue, and green fluorescence combined) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) by subgroup: Proximal surfaces (detection of early enamel caries, D1 threshold) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

All fluorescence-based devices (red, blue, and green fluorescence combined) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) by subgroup: Occlusal surfaces (detection of early enamel caries, D1 threshold) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride mouthrinse (any fluoride agent, concentration, volume, frequency or technique; swished and expectorated, not swallowed) vs placebo or no treatment

Unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

It is very uncertain whether fluoride mouthrinse (any fluoride agent, concentration, volume,… changes unacceptability of treatment as measured by leaving study early… compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride mouthrinse (0.05-0.32% sodium fluoride or amine fluoride) added to daily fluoride toothpaste vs Fluoride mouthrinse

Unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride mouthrinse combined with fluoride toothpaste showed no clear difference in unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) compared with fluoride mouthrinse alone; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride gel combined with fluoride mouthrinse vs Fluoride gel

Unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride gel combined with fluoride mouthrinse showed no clear difference in unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) compared with fluoride gel alone; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride varnish combined with fluoride toothpaste vs Fluoride varnish

Unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride varnish combined with fluoride toothpaste showed no clear difference in unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) compared with fluoride varnish alone; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride varnish combined with fluoride toothpaste vs Fluoride toothpaste alone

Unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride varnish combined with fluoride toothpaste showed no clear difference in unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) compared with fluoride toothpaste alone; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride mouthrinse, gel or varnish combined with fluoride toothpaste (any combined regimen) vs Fluoride toothpaste alone

Unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride mouthrinse, gel or varnish combined with fluoride… showed no clear difference in unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) compared with fluoride toothpaste alone; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride mouthrinse (0.05-0.32% sodium fluoride or amine fluoride) added to daily fluoride toothpaste vs Fluoride toothpaste alone

Unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride mouthrinse combined with fluoride toothpaste showed no clear difference in unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) compared with fluoride toothpaste alone; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Maternal smoking during pregnancy vs No maternal smoking during pregnancy

Dental caries in children · Children of mothers assessed for smoking status during pregnancy (early childhood dental caries)

In the USA study, maternal smoking during pregnancy was associated with increased odds of childhood dental caries (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.49).

15 findings from 1 review
Show 12 more findings

Analogue (conventional) radiographs vs Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) (direct within-person / paired comparison); reference standard: histology

Diagnostic accuracy: analogue versus CBCT (within-person, not pooled) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
    Direct comparison analogue vs CBCT (within-person): 6 datasets from 3 studies (737 tooth sites or surfaces) provided data, but the results could not be pooled; only individual study results are shown (Figure 21). No…
    3 studies
    GRADE not reported

Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

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
  • Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies) · Pit and fissure sealants
    Pre-specified heterogeneity investigation of surfaces with pit and fissure sealants: no study reported the inclusion of sealants that would allow evaluation of early caries lesions.
    0 studies
    No studies found

Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Diagnostic accuracy in previously restored teeth (secondary caries) · 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
  • Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies) · Restorations (secondary caries)
    Pre-specified heterogeneity investigation of teeth with previously applied restorations (secondary caries): no study intentionally included restored teeth in its sample. Studies evaluating secondary caries were…
    0 studies
    No studies found

Fluorides combined with CPP-ACP vs Fluorides alone (monotherapy)

Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) change · Patients with early caries lesions in permanent teeth (non-fluoridated water area)

Adding CPP-ACP to fluorides did not significantly change QLF outcomes for smooth-surface early caries lesions versus fluorides alone; not GRADE-rated.

1 finding from 1 review