Search

What do systematic reviews say?

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

236 questions · 264 findings · 10 reviews · Other oral health

No studies found 45 · 17%GRADE not reported 127 · 48.1%Very low 24 · 9.1%Low 46 · 17.4%Moderate 13 · 4.9%High 9 · 3.4%

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

Proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of dental care) · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Dental attendance · primary or secondary school pupils

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

1 finding from 1 review

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

Developmental defects of enamel measured by any validated index · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Trauma to permanent incisor teeth · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India
1 finding from 1 review
  • Milsom 2006 reported the prevalence of trauma to the permanent incisor teeth as a dichotomous outcome (reduction from baseline yes/no); we were unable to include this data in a meta-analysis.
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Referral to a specific dental treatment facility vs Generic advice letter to see a dentist

Dental attendance · School children, primary school in Saudi Arabia

It is very uncertain whether referral to a specific dental treatment facility changes dental attendance (number of dental visits) compared with generic advice letter to see a dentist (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Dental attendance · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India
1 finding from 1 review
  • School dental screening programmes for oral health 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes
    3 to 4 months
    Data not pooled; 6281 participants (4 RCTs); Very low. There was substantial heterogeneity, in part due to study design (3 cluster-RCTs and 1 individually randomised trial). We are unable to draw conclusions about this…
    4 studies · 6281 participants
    Very low

Traditional screening with motivation (oral health education and offer of free treatment) vs Traditional screening

Dental attendance · School children, primary and secondary schools in India

It is very uncertain whether traditional screening with motivation (oral health education and… changes dental attendance compared with traditional screening alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) of self-regulation vs Standard referral letter

Proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of dental care) · School children, primary schools in the USA

It is very uncertain whether referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) of… changes proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of… compared with standard referral letter (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Criteria-based screening with specific (personalised) referral letter vs Criteria-based screening with non-specific referral letter

Dental attendance at orthodontist · School children, secondary school in the UK (aged 11 to 13 years)

It is very uncertain whether criteria-based screening with specific (personalised) referral letter changes dental attendance at orthodontist compared with criteria-based screening with non-specific referral letter (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) plus dental information guide (DIG) vs Referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) alone

Proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of dental care) · School children, primary schools in the USA

It is very uncertain whether referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) plus dental… changes proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of… compared with referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Malocclusion or orthodontic treatment needs measured by any validated index · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Proportion of children with other untreated oral health needs · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Referral to a specific dental treatment facility vs Generic advice letter to see a dentist

Number of caries in primary teeth (dt index) · School children, primary school in Saudi Arabia

It is very uncertain whether referral to a specific dental treatment facility changes number of caries in primary teeth (dt index) compared with generic advice letter to see a dentist (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Dental caries prevalence · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India
1 finding from 1 review
  • 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

Referral to a specific dental treatment facility vs Generic advice letter to see a dentist

Number of caries in permanent teeth (DT index) · School children, primary school in Saudi Arabia

It is very uncertain whether referral to a specific dental treatment facility changes number of caries in permanent teeth (DT index) compared with generic advice letter to see a dentist (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Cost‐effectiveness · School children (aged 4 to 15 years), primary and secondary schools in the UK and India

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) of self-regulation plus dental information guide (DIG) vs Standard referral letter

Proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of dental care) · School children, primary schools in the USA

It is very uncertain whether referral letter based on the common-sense model (CSM) of… changes proportion of children with treated/untreated caries (receipt of… compared with standard referral letter (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review