ArticlePloS one2015
A systematic map of systematic reviews in pediatric dentistry--what do we really know?
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
46 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Mapping Systematic Reviews on the Management of Dental Caries in Primary Teeth: A Meta-research.Current pediatric reviews · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review of risk assessment tools for early childhood caries: is there evidence?European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Dental caries prevention strategies among children and adolescents with immigrant - or low socioeconomic backgrounds- do they work? A systematic review.BMC oral health · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Best clinical practice guidance for management of early caries lesions in children and young adults: an EAPD policy document.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2016Guideline
- Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Children and Adolescents With Dental or Injection Phobia: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Trial
- Caries experience among children and adolescents from a longitudinal Swedish national registry study over a 10-year period.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Development of a novel method to evaluate gingivitis in children by combining rapid saliva test systems.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Relationship Between Manual Dexterity and Toothbrushing Efficiency in Preschool Children: A Crossover Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Do randomised clinical trials on dental caries adopt Open Science practices?BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Why Is Caries Prevention in Children So Difficult? A Narrative Opinion.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Pediatric dentistry systematic reviews using the GRADE approach: methodological study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Article
- Evidence Mapping and Quality Analysis of Systematic Reviews on Various Aspects Related to Cleft Lip and Palate.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Relationship between vitamin D status and caries experience in a group of Egyptian children: a cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Prevalence and socio-behavioral determinants of early childhood caries in children 1-5- year- old in Iran.PloS one · 2023Article
- Toothbrushing and Access to Dental Services in Peruvian Children.Global pediatric health · 2023Article
- A qualitative study of barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a pilot school-based, toothbrushing programme.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- Establishing the research agenda for oral healthcare using the Dialogue Model-patient involvement in a joint research agenda with practitioners.European journal of oral sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify, appraise and summarize existing knowledge and knowledge gaps in practice-relevant questions in pediatric dentistry.
methodsA systematic mapping of systematic reviews was undertaken for domains considered important in daily clinical practice. The literature search covered questions in the following domains: behavior management problems/dental anxiety; caries risk assessment and caries detection including radiographic technologies; prevention and non-operative treatment of caries in primary and young permanent teeth; operative treatment of caries in primary and young permanent teeth; prevention and treatment of periodontal disease; management of tooth developmental and mineralization disturbances; prevention and treatment of oral conditions in children with chronic diseases/developmental disturbances/obesity; diagnosis, prevention and treatment of dental erosion and tooth wear; treatment of traumatic injuries in primary and young permanent teeth and cost-effectiveness of these interventions. Abstracts and full text reviews were assessed independently by two reviewers and any differences were solved by consensus. AMSTAR was used to assess the risk of bias of each included systematic review. Reviews judged as having a low or moderate risk of bias were used to formulate existing knowledge and knowledge gaps.
resultsOut of 81 systematic reviews meeting the inclusion criteria, 38 were judged to have a low or moderate risk of bias. Half of them concerned caries prevention. The quality of evidence was high for a caries-preventive effect of daily use of fluoride toothpaste and moderate for fissure sealing with resin-based materials. For the rest the quality of evidence for the effects of interventions was low or very low.
conclusionThere is an urgent need for primary clinical research of good quality in most clinically-relevant domains in pediatric dentistry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.