Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

40 questions · 50 findings · 2 reviews · Dental caries · All outcomes

No studies found 6 · 12%GRADE not reported 38 · 76%Very low 2 · 4%Low 4 · 8%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Fluoride-releasing resin-based sealant vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Development of >=1 new carious lesion (caries incidence) · Children with caries-free or non-cavitated carious lesion primary molars, aged 3-7 years (paediatric department, dental hospital, France)
2 findings from 1 review

Glass ionomer-based sealant vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Development of >=1 new carious lesion (caries incidence) · Children with caries-free primary first molars (with or without caries on other teeth), aged 1-5 years (paediatric clinic/dental school,…

Glass ionomer-based sealant may leads to lower development of >=1 new carious lesion (caries incidence) compared with no sealant (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Fluoride-releasing resin-based sealant vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Mean caries increment (mean number of new cavitated occlusal lesions) · Children with caries-free or non-cavitated carious lesion primary molars, aged 3-7 years (paediatric department, dental hospital, France)
1 finding from 1 review
  • Sealants for preventing dental caries in primary teeth 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
    24 months
    Mean number of new cavitated occlusal lesions 0.23 (SD 0.06) in sealed molars vs 0.29 (SD 0.06) in control molars (Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test P = 0.42)
    1 study · 85 participants
    GRADE not reported

Glass ionomer-based sealant vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Retention of sealant (complete or partial retention) · Children with caries-free primary first molars (with or without caries on other teeth), aged 1-5 years (paediatric clinic/dental school,…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Sealants for preventing dental caries in primary teeth 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
    6-30 months
    Chadwick 2005: one or more sealants fully/partially retained in 69 (31.2%) children at 12-30 months; Joshi 2019: at 12 months 75 (43.6%) teeth completely retained, 58 (33.7%) partially retained, 39 (22.7%) completely…
    2 studies
    GRADE not reported

Autopolymerised sealant vs Light polymerised sealant

Retention of sealant (complete or partial retention) · Children with sound primary molars, aged 2-4 years (municipal dental clinics or hospital paediatric clinics, Denmark)

It is very uncertain whether autopolymerised sealant changes retention of sealant (complete or partial retention) compared with light polymerised sealant (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride-releasing resin-based sealant vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Retention of sealant (complete or partial retention) · Children with caries-free or non-cavitated carious lesion primary molars, aged 3-7 years (paediatric department, dental hospital, France)
1 finding from 1 review
  • Sealants for preventing dental caries in primary teeth 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
    12-24 months
    At 12 months, sealants on 96 (70.1%) surfaces completely retained, 25 (18.3%) partially retained, 16 (11.6%) completely lost; at 24 months, 58 (45.3%) completely retained, 29 (22.7%) partially retained, 41 (32%)…
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Autopolymerised sealant vs Light polymerised sealant

Development of >=1 new carious lesion (caries incidence) · Children with sound primary molars, aged 2-4 years (municipal dental clinics or hospital paediatric clinics, Denmark)

It is very uncertain whether autopolymerised sealant changes development of >=1 new carious lesion (caries incidence) compared with light polymerised sealant (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Glass ionomer-based sealant vs No sealant (control/no treatment)

Dental caries increment, DMFT/dmft (whole-tooth level) · Children with caries-free primary first molars (with or without caries on other teeth), aged 1-5 years (paediatric clinic/dental school,…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Sealants for preventing dental caries in primary teeth 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
    12 months
    Joshi 2019: dmft 8.43 (SD 5.84) with sealant vs 10.05 (SD 6.16) with no sealant at 12 months (caries threshold uncertain); Chadwick 2005: no significant difference in caries increment on occlusal surfaces, no summary…
    2 studies
    GRADE not reported

PDHA program with robust prevention vs PDHA program or PDHA program with intensive staffing

Tooth decay-free children · Alaska children aged 5 to 18 years

The robust prevention PDHA model was projected to yield more than 50% tooth decay-free children versus 8% with other PDHA models, without a GRADE rating.

1 finding from 1 review

Community and caregiver oral health education plus media campaign vs Pre-intervention BBTD rate

Baby bottle tooth decay prevalence · Alaska Native and American Indian Head Start children

High-intensity community education was associated with a 33% reduction in BBTD prevalence, without a GRADE rating.

3 findings from 1 review

Primary dental health aide (PDHA) service-delivery models (PDHA program; PDHA + intensive staffing; PDHA + robust prevention) vs Baseline pre-intervention service-delivery scenario

Projected Significant Caries (SiC) index · Alaska Native children (below age 18)

A simulation projected a 50% drop in the Significant Caries index for children (12.3 to 6.1) under the PDHA model (certainty not graded).

2 findings from 1 review

Primary dental health aide (PDHA) service-delivery models (PDHA program; PDHA + intensive staffing; PDHA + robust prevention) vs Baseline pre-intervention service-delivery scenario

Projected proportion of caries-free children (5-18 years) · Alaska Native children (below age 18)

A simulation projected 0% of children aged 5-18 would be caries-free under the baseline scenario (certainty not graded).

3 findings from 1 review

DHAT-delivered dental care vs Dentist-delivered dental care

Technical performance / deficient restorations (DHATs vs dentists) · Alaska Native dental patients (children aged 6-17 and adults) and their caregivers

DHATs had a lower amalgam restoration deficiency rate than dentists (12% vs 22%; certainty not graded).

3 findings from 1 review

DHAT-delivered dental care vs Not applicable (single-group prevalence)

Clinical care quality · Alaska dental health aide therapists

Four newly trained DHATs met stated clinical care standards in a qualitative evaluation, without a GRADE rating.

1 finding from 1 review