Primary study · included by 1 review

Cankovic (2015)

ProbableThe reviews cited this study without a PMID, DOI or NCT, so it is matched by first author and year. Two different studies by the same author in the same year could be merged here.

Included by

Outcome this study informsPooled effectEvidenceCertainty
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.15 [0.07, 0.25]15 studies · 7815 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.14 [0.06, 0.24]15 studies · 7929 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.15 [0.06, 0.25]15 studies · 8029 participantsGRADE not reported
Recurrent aphthous stomatitis prevalence
· Current
Prevalence proportion 0.14 [0.06, 0.24]16 studiesGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.15 [0.07, 0.26]15 studies · 6995 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.14 [0.06, 0.25]15 studies · 7629 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.14 [0.06, 0.25]15 studies · 7815 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.12 [0.05, 0.20]15 studies · 8093 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.15 [0.07, 0.26]15 studies · 7109 participantsGRADE not reported
Recurrent aphthous stomatitis prevalence
· Current
Meta-regression coefficient -0.13NRGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.13 [0.05, 0.22]15 studies · 7329 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.14 [0.06, 0.24]15 studies · 8050 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.15 [0.07, 0.25]15 studies · 7136 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.15 [0.07, 0.25]15 studies · 7788 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.15 [0.06, 0.25]15 studies · 8029 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.14 [0.06, 0.25]15 studies · 6349 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.11 [0.05, 0.19]15 studies · 7786 participantsGRADE not reported
Prevalence of recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Not applicable (prevalence) vs Not applicable (prevalence) · Point (current) prevalence
Prevalence (proportion) 0.14 [0.06, 0.24]15 studies · 8054 participantsGRADE not reported

1 including review in total.