Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

18 questions · 36 findings · 6 reviews · Dental caries

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 25 · 69.4%Very low 0 · 0%Low 10 · 27.8%Moderate 0 · 0%High 1 · 2.8%

Fluoride concentration relative to the acceptable range (electrometric ion-selective electrode measurement; acceptable range mostly 0.6-0.8 ppmF) vs None (descriptive proportion meta-analysis)

Water samples with fluoride concentration below the acceptable range · Artificially fluoridated public water supply in Brazilian cities (water samples under external control)

In the Northeast Brazilian region, a pooled 79.7% of water samples had fluoride below the acceptable range; ungraded.

2 findings from 1 review

Fluoride concentration relative to the acceptable range (electrometric ion-selective electrode measurement; acceptable range mostly 0.6-0.8 ppmF) vs None (descriptive proportion meta-analysis)

Water samples with fluoride concentration above the acceptable range · Artificially fluoridated public water supply in Brazilian cities (water samples under external control)

In the Southeast Brazilian region, a pooled 11.5% of water samples had fluoride above the acceptable range; ungraded.

2 findings from 1 review

Fluoride concentration relative to the acceptable range (electrometric ion-selective electrode measurement; acceptable range mostly 0.6-0.8 ppmF) vs None (descriptive proportion meta-analysis)

Water samples with fluoride concentration outside the acceptable range · Artificially fluoridated public water supply in Brazilian cities (water samples under external control)

In Brazilian cities using external control, more than half of artificially fluoridated public water supply samples (pooled 56.6%, 95% CI 45.5 to 67.3) had fluoride concentrations outside the acceptable range, with very high heterogeneity (I2=99.5%); ungraded.

3 findings from 1 review

Ion-releasing restoration, glass ionomer-based (conventional GIC, HV-GIC, RMGIC, glass hybrid) vs Resin composite restoration

Marginal adaptation (unacceptable marginal adaptation) · Patients with permanent dentition in need of restorations (all cavity types: Black's Class I, II, V, and non-carious cervical lesions)

Across follow-up periods, there was no statistically significant difference in unacceptable marginal adaptation between GIC and resin composite restorations.

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

Ion-releasing restorations (IRR): RMGIC, HVGIC, GIC, compomer/PMRC, giomer vs Composite resin (CR), including bulk-fill composite

Adequate marginal adaptation · Children receiving dental restorations (aged 4-11 years; primary teeth; Class I/II/V cavities)

No significant difference between IRR and CR in marginal adaptation (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Strategies to integrate oral health into primary care (e.g., training/education of non-dental primary care professionals, policy/financing and health-insurance changes, colocation of dental and medical services, interprofessional and community-health-worker collaboration, teledentistry, integrated oral health assessment tools, school-based activities) vs No integration / usual care (or pre-integration baseline; many included studies uncontrolled)

Access to oral healthcare (referral pathways, documentation processes, operating efficiencies, staffing, visits for oral health issues, uptake of fluoride varnish/other preventive treatment, and visits to an oral health professional) · People of all ages and abilities served through primary care and related settings (children, pregnant women, older adults in…

Most strategies to integrate oral health into primary care were associated with improved access to oral healthcare (19 studies, narrative synthesis; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review
  • Strategies to integrate oral health into primary care: a systematic review. 2023 All outcomes
    Primary care, community, school, and aged-care/residential/nursing-home settings
    Access to oral healthcare was the primary outcome most studied (n=19). Most studies reported results favouring the integration strategy, including improvements in referral pathways, documentation processes, operating…
    19 studies
    GRADE not reported

External control of fluoride concentration vs Not applicable

Water samples with fluoride concentration outside the acceptable range · Brazilian cities with artificially fluoridated public water supplies

After excluding Silva et al., the pooled prevalence outside the acceptable range was 47.1%.

1 finding from 1 review

External control of fluoride concentration vs Not applicable

Water samples with fluoride concentration below the acceptable range · Brazilian cities in the Southeast region with artificially fluoridated public water supplies

In the Southeast region, 24.6% of samples were below the acceptable range.

1 finding from 1 review

External control of fluoride concentration vs Not applicable

Water samples with fluoride concentration above the acceptable range · Brazilian cities in the Northeast region with artificially fluoridated public water supplies

In the Northeast region, 0.2% of samples were above the acceptable range.

1 finding from 1 review

Laser enamel preparation alone (Er,Cr:YSGG or CO2 laser) vs Acid-etching (phosphoric acid)

Acceptability · Caries-free children to young adults with premolars/molars requiring pit-and-fissure sealants

Both laser and acid-etching preparation were well accepted by patients (VAS, P = 1.000; ungraded, single study).

1 finding from 1 review

Low polymerization shrinkage resin composite (silorane, ormocer, bulk-fill or other modified-monomer composite) vs Conventional methacrylate-based resin composite

Marginal adaptation (clinically detectable deterioration) · People with permanent posterior teeth restored with class I or II direct restorations

At 60 months, marginal adaptation did not differ significantly between the composites (4 groups; ungraded).

5 findings from 1 review
Show 2 more findings

Ion-releasing restoration, glass ionomer-based (conventional GIC, HV-GIC, RMGIC, glass hybrid) vs Resin composite restoration

Secondary caries · Patients with permanent dentition in need of restorations (all cavity types: Black's Class I, II, V, and non-carious cervical lesions)

Pooled across follow-up periods, ion-releasing (GIC) and resin composite restorations show no significant difference in secondary caries (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.00; not separately GRADE-rated).

6 findings from 1 review
Show 3 more findings

Ion-releasing restoration (glass ionomer-based and compomer/polyacid-modified composite) vs Resin composite restoration

Secondary caries (caries around restorations), load-bearing cavities · Patients with permanent dentition in need of restorations in load-bearing cavities (Class I/II posterior)

In load-bearing cavities, ion-releasing (GIC and compomer) and resin composite restorations show no significant difference in secondary caries (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review