Non-Cochrane · aetiology · PM31571246

Vegetarian diet and its possible influence on dental health: A systematic literature review.

Smits Kirsten P J, Listl Stefan, Jevdjevic Milica · Community dentistry and oral epidemiology · 2020 · PubMed · doi:10.1111/cdoe.12498

Oral HealthDental cariesAMSTAR 2: not applicable
Full textEvery question was extracted from the full text, figures and supplements by two independent LLM extractors, disagreements adjudicated. Rows cite where in the review the value comes from.
Questions
9
current version
GRADE rated
0
No studies
0
Included studies
19
linked below
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 9 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Review question

ElementPlanned (methods)Found (results)
PopulationPeople assessed for dental hard-tissue health, comparing those following a vegetarian diet with those following a nonvegetarian diet (observational or intervention studies)18 studies (21 papers); 16 cross-sectional and 2 baseline reports of RCTs (treated as cross-sectional); mostly India (n=9), Finland (n=3), other European countries (n=4), Brazil (n=1), Trinidad and Tobago (n=1); source studies published 1979-2018
InterventionVegetarian diet (any diet excluding all meat, poultry and fish)Vegetarian diet
ComparisonNonvegetarian dietNonvegetarian diet
Outcomes(a) Noncarious/cervical lesions (NCCL: dental erosion, dental abrasion, cervical buccal defects); (b) dental caries (DMFT/DMFS, decayed/filled teeth or surfaces, (non)visible lesions, white spots); (c) number of natural teeth (missing/present teeth, edentulousness, MT component of DMFT)Meta-analysed: presence of dental erosion (6 studies; OR 2.40) and DMFT score (4 studies; MD -0.15). Narrative: other NCCL/tooth wear, other dental caries measures (DMFS, decayed surfaces/teeth, root caries, white spots) and number of natural teeth
Study designsOriginal observational or intervention studies comparing dental health in vegetarians vs nonvegetariansCross-sectional studies (n=16) and baseline reports of RCTs (n=2), the latter treated as cross-sectional
TimingNot specified (no date or period restriction)Not specified (cross-sectional); source studies published 1979-2018

Search date: 2019-04-17. Databases: PubMed; EMBASE; Web of Science; CINAHL

Questions and results

Vegetarian diet (any diet excluding all meat, poultry and fish) vs Nonvegetarian diet

Population: General population (children and adults) assessed for dental hard-tissue health
9 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Noncarious/cervical lesions and tooth wear (measures other than pooled dental erosion)
Beyond dental erosion, vegetarians tended to have a higher prevalence of other NCCL and tooth wear than nonvegetarians, reported narratively (ungraded).
Source: Results (NCCL); Appendix S5 (not in extracted text) · same question in other reviews
Eleven studies reported on NCCL using six definitions (presence of NCCL, presence of dental erosion, presence and severity of tooth wear, dental abrasion, cervical buccal defects); the six reporting presence of dental…NRUngraded
Dental caries (mean DMFT score)
Adults only
Among adults, the lower DMFT score in vegetarians was smaller and not statistically significant (mean difference -0.09, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.13; ungraded).
Source: Results (Dental caries); Figure 3B · same question in other reviews
MD -0.09 [-0.32, 0.13]3 studiesUngraded
Presence of dental erosion
Adults only
Among adults, vegetarian diet was associated with almost threefold higher odds of dental erosion (OR 2.94, 95% CI 1.64 to 5.26; ungraded).
Source: Results (NCCL); Figure 2C · same question in other reviews
OR 2.94 [1.64, 5.26]5 studiesUngraded
Presence of dental erosion
Adults only, excluding Linkosalo & Markkanen 1985
Among adults and excluding the outlier study, vegetarian diet was associated with higher odds of dental erosion with no heterogeneity (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.77 to 3.71; ungraded).
Source: Results (NCCL); Figure 2D · same question in other reviews
OR 2.56 [1.77, 3.71]4 studiesUngraded
Number of natural teeth (missing/present teeth, edentulousness, MT component of DMFT)
Evidence on the number of natural teeth was conflicting and could not be pooled (ungraded).
Source: Results (Number of teeth); Appendix S5 (not in extracted text) · same question in other reviews
Seven studies reported on the number of teeth with conflicting findings; meta-analysis was not possible due to inconsistent outcome definitions. One study found vegetarians had significantly more teeth; two found no…7 studiesUngraded
Presence of dental erosion
A vegetarian diet was associated with about twofold higher odds of dental erosion than a nonvegetarian diet (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.66; ungraded, mostly low-quality studies).
Source: Abstract; Results (NCCL); Figure 2A · same question in other reviews
OR 2.40 [1.24, 4.66]6 studiesUngraded
Presence of dental erosion
Sensitivity analysis excluding Linkosalo & Markkanen 1985 (outlier)
After excluding an outlier study, the association between vegetarian diet and dental erosion remained significant (OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.27; ungraded).
Source: Results (NCCL); Figure 2B · same question in other reviews
OR 1.97 [1.19, 3.27]5 studiesUngraded
Dental caries measures other than pooled DMFT (DMFS, decayed/filled surfaces and teeth, root caries, nonvisible lesions, white spots)
Evidence on other dental-caries measures was inconsistent: some indices (decayed surfaces/teeth, root caries, white spots) were higher in vegetarians while some studies found lower caries in vegetarian children (ungraded).
Source: Results (Dental caries); Appendix S5 (not in extracted text) · same question in other reviews
Eleven studies reported dental caries using 11 definitions; four (DMFT) were meta-analysed (see O2). Narrative findings were inconsistent: DMFS results were mixed; decayed surfaces and decayed teeth and percentages of…NRUngraded
Dental caries (mean DMFT score)
Vegetarians had a slightly lower mean DMFT (dental caries) score than nonvegetarians (mean difference -0.15, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.02; ungraded, mostly low-quality studies).
Source: Abstract; Results (Dental caries); Figure 3A · same question in other reviews
MD -0.15 [-0.29, -0.02]4 studiesUngraded

Included primary studies 19

Open as a trial list
StudyAlso included byOutcomes it informs hereTrial PICOResults
Al-Diagn, Shaw & Smith 2001
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlyPresence of dental erosionnot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Al-Diaigan, Shaw & Smith 2001
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Chandra & Chawla 1979
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Chandra 1979
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Herman 2011
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlyPresence of dental erosionnot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Laffranchi 2010
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Laffranchi 2010 / Zotti 2014
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Linkosalo & Markkanen 1985
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlyPresence of dental erosionnot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Linkosalo 1988
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlyPresence of dental erosionnot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Pedrao 2018
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Rafeek 2006
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Rafeek 2006 / Smith 2008
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Rahmatulla & Guile 1990
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlyPM31571246-P3-O1not extracted yetnot extracted yet
Shah 2004
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Sherfudhin 1996
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlyPM31571246-P3-O1not extracted yetnot extracted yet
Smith 2008
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Staufenbiel 2013 / 2015
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Staufenbiel 2015
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet
Zotti 2014
matched by author and year (probable)
this review onlynot statednot extracted yetnot extracted yet