ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2025
Do we have enough evidence to recommend hydroxyapatite toothpaste for preventing dental caries?
Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Navigating fluoride hesitancy: mapping the evidence base for fluoride-free toothpaste alternatives.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
a commentary onPawinska M, Paszynska E, Amaechi B T, Meyer F, Enax J, Limeback H Clinical evidence of caries prevention by hydroxyapatite: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2024; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105429 . DATA SOURCES: The search strategy for this review aimed at finding the published articles in which hydroxyapatite has been used as an intervention agent for caries prevention, compared with either active control like fluoride-products, placebo, or no interventions. For this, authors used a combination of keywords indicative of various PICOS framework elements. The search was carried out in various electronic databases, including Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. STUDY SELECTION: Both clinical trials and in-situ studies were included in this review. A total of 1245 articles were retrieved from the search, but 1227 articles were removed as they did not meet the inclusion/exclusion criteria. A total of 18 articles, including clinical trials and in-situ studies, were included in the review. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: All the included articles were assessed for quality using NHLBI criteria before including them in the meta-analysis. The outcome measures from the clinical trials mainly included the caries incidence, recorded as dmft(s)/DMFT(S) or using ICDAS criteria, while the data for outcome measures from in-situ studies included different surrogate markers.
resultsThe meta-analysis done for the included clinical trials depicted HAP toothpastes to be significantly better for caries prevention when compared with the placebo toothpastes (pooled OR = 2.51). The results also favored HAP toothpaste when compared with fluoride toothpaste (pooled OR = 1.1) but the results were non-significant. For in-situ studies too, significant results were obtained, favouring HAP toothpaste in terms of lesion depth (overall mean change of 1.15 µm) and bacterial loads (overall mean reduction of 65%), while non-significant results, favouring HAP, were obtained in terms of remineralization (overall mean change of 2.8%).
conclusionsHAP toothpastes are found to be effective in preventing caries and can be considered as good alternative for fluoride.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39984606What 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.