What do systematic reviews say?

Individually designed, patient-centred preventive programme: dietary counselling (snacking timing, regular meals, fermentable carbohydrates) plus toothbrushing counselling, delivered by trained dental hygienists (a multi-intervention) vs Basic prevention offered as standard in public dental clinics

• One‐to‐one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 to 4 years
  Table 2: 52% (130) versus 53% (131) at follow-up (baseline 41% versus 44%). No significant change.
  1 study · 497 participants
  GRADE not reported

Individually designed, patient-centred preventive programme: dietary counselling (snacking timing, regular meals, fermentable carbohydrates) plus toothbrushing counselling, delivered by trained dental hygienists (a multi-intervention) vs Basic prevention offered as standard in public dental clinics

• One‐to‐one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 to 4 years
  Table 2: 86% (215) intervention versus 83% (205) control at follow-up (baseline 74% versus 77%). No significant change.
  1 study · 497 participants
  GRADE not reported

Individually designed, patient-centred preventive programme: dietary counselling (snacking timing, regular meals, fermentable carbohydrates) plus toothbrushing counselling, delivered by trained dental hygienists (a multi-intervention) vs Basic prevention offered as standard in public dental clinics

• One‐to‐one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 to 4 years
  Table 2: 77% (193) versus 75% (185) at follow-up (baseline 71% versus 69%). No significant change.
  1 study · 497 participants
  GRADE not reported

Individually designed, patient-centred preventive programme: dietary counselling (snacking timing, regular meals, fermentable carbohydrates) plus toothbrushing counselling, delivered by trained dental hygienists (a multi-intervention) vs Basic prevention offered as standard in public dental clinics

• One‐to‐one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  Mean (95% CI) DMFS increment after 4 years: intervention 2.56 (2.07 to 3.05) versus control 4.60 (3.99 to 5.21); significant difference favouring the intervention (P<0.0001; non-overlapping CIs). No between-group point…
  1 study · 497 participants
  GRADE not reported
• One‐to‐one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 years
  Mean (95% CI) DMFS increment after 2 years: intervention 1.86 (1.50 to 2.21) versus control 2.44 (2.12 to 2.77); significant difference favouring the intervention (P<0.05, comparing intervention and control). No…
  1 study · 497 participants
  GRADE not reported

Individually designed, patient-centred preventive programme: dietary counselling (snacking timing, regular meals, fermentable carbohydrates) plus toothbrushing counselling, delivered by trained dental hygienists (a multi-intervention) vs Basic prevention offered as standard in public dental clinics

• One‐to‐one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 to 4 years
  Table 2: 71% (178) versus 68% (168) at follow-up (baseline 69% versus 65%). No significant change.
  1 study · 497 participants
  GRADE not reported

Individually designed, patient-centred preventive programme: dietary counselling (snacking timing, regular meals, fermentable carbohydrates) plus toothbrushing counselling, delivered by trained dental hygienists (a multi-intervention) vs Basic prevention offered as standard in public dental clinics

• One‐to‐one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 to 4 years
  Table 2: 77% (193) versus 81% (200) at follow-up (baseline 83% versus 74%, a significant baseline difference). No significant change at follow-up.
  1 study · 497 participants
  GRADE not reported

Individually designed, patient-centred preventive programme: dietary counselling (snacking timing, regular meals, fermentable carbohydrates) plus toothbrushing counselling, delivered by trained dental hygienists (a multi-intervention) vs Basic prevention offered as standard in public dental clinics

• One‐to‐one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 to 4 years
  Table 2: 87% (218) versus 86% (212) at follow-up (baseline 81% versus 87%). No significant change.
  1 study · 497 participants
  GRADE not reported

Individually designed, patient-centred preventive programme: dietary counselling (snacking timing, regular meals, fermentable carbohydrates) plus toothbrushing counselling, delivered by trained dental hygienists (a multi-intervention) vs Basic prevention offered as standard in public dental clinics

Individually designed, patient-centred preventive programme: dietary… led to higher using xylitol products more than 3 times per day compared with basic prevention offered as standard in public dental clinics; GRADE not reported.

• One‐to‐one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes

  2 to 4 years
  RR 1.32 [1.04, 1.68]
  1 study · 497 participants
  GRADE not reported

Criteria-based screening (dentist refers using pre-established criteria) vs Traditional screening

It is very uncertain whether criteria-based screening (dentist refers using pre-established… changes dental attendance compared with traditional screening (very low certainty).

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes

  3 to 4 months
  RR 1.01 [0.94, 1.08]
  2 studies · 5316 participants
  Very low

Criteria-based screening (dentist refers using pre-established criteria) vs No screening

Criteria-based screening (dentist refers using pre-established… showed no clear difference in dental attendance compared with no screening (low certainty).

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes

  3 to 4 months
  RR 1.07 [0.99, 1.16]
  2 studies · 4980 participants
  Low

Depot corticosteroids (systemic; 40 mg methylprednisolone IM every 3 weeks for 27 weeks) vs placebo injection

Depot corticosteroids (systemic; 40 mg methylprednisolone IM every 3… showed no clear difference in mean number of oral ulcers compared with placebo (saline IM injection); GRADE not reported.

• Interventions for managing oral ulcers in Behçet's disease 2014 · Cochrane All outcomes

  End of treatment (week 27)
  MD 0.00 [-0.47, 0.47]
  1 study · 85 participants
  GRADE not reported

One-to-one dietary intervention aimed at preventing tooth erosion (e.g., reducing consumption of acidic/carbonated drinks) vs No dietary advice, or different dietary advice

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• One‐to‐one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
  There were no studies concerned with dietary change aimed at preventing tooth erosion.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Traditional screening (referral card given if the inspecting dentist judges the child needs to see a dentist) vs No screening

• School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Milsom 2006 measured prevalence of dental caries as mean number of teeth with active caries in primary teeth (dt) and permanent teeth (DT); post-intervention changes from baseline were not significant, and the authors…
  1 study · 16684 participants
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in dental caries: prevalence of root caries compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall; GRADE not reported.

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  RR 0.93 [0.76, 1.13]
  1 study · 1306 participants
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in dental caries: prevalence of moderate to extensive caries (ICDAS 3-6) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall (low certainty).

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  RR 1.05 [0.92, 1.20]
  1 study · 271 participants
  Low

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in dental caries: prevalence of moderate to extensive caries (ICDAS 3-6) compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall (moderate certainty).

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  RR 1.04 [0.99, 1.09]
  1 study · 1478 participants
  Moderate

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 24-month recall

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in dental caries: prevalence of root caries compared with clinical examination with 24-month recall; GRADE not reported.

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  RR 1.21 [0.72, 2.03]
  1 study · 247 participants
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with 24-month recall vs Clinical examination with 6-month recall

Clinical examination with 24-month recall showed no clear difference in dental caries: prevalence of root caries compared with clinical examination with 6-month recall; GRADE not reported.

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  RR 1.17 [0.65, 2.11]
  1 study · 238 participants
  GRADE not reported

Clinical examination with risk-based recall vs Clinical examination with 24-month recall

Clinical examination with risk-based recall showed no clear difference in dental caries: prevalence of moderate to extensive caries (ICDAS 3-6) compared with clinical examination with 24-month recall (moderate certainty).

• Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes

  4 years
  RR 1.06 [0.95, 1.19]
  1 study · 279 participants
  Moderate

GTR rm + CAF vs GTR nrm + CAF

• Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Short term (6 to 12 months)
  Roccuzzo 1996: all patients preferred the GTR treatment because it was a single-step procedure
  1 study
  GRADE not reported