Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40491584›Full record

ReviewJournal of Taibah University Medical Sciences2025

Differences in dental caries experience between super-tasters and non-tasters: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Heba Ashi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Heba AshiDepartment of Dental Public Health, Dentistry, King Abdul Aziz University, Jeddah, KSA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The investigation into the interplay between taste perception and caries experience is not only relevant from a clinical standpoint but also holds implications for public health interventions and personalized oral health care. This systematic review comprehensively examined and synthesized the existing body of literature on the differences in caries experience in super- and non-tasters of PROP (6-n-propylthiouracil). Methods: An electronic literature search was conducted on PubMED, EMBASE, OVID, Google Scholar, CENTRAL, and ISI Web of Knowledge. The keywords/medical subject headings (MeSH) were: (dental caries) AND ((taste) OR (non-taster) OR (super-taster) OR (taste sensitivity) OR (taste buds) OR (gustation)) AND ((6-n-propylthiouracil) OR (PROP)). Only prospective clinical studies that had distinct groups of super-tasters and non-tasters were included. Meta-analysis of the standardized mean differences of Decayed, Missing, and Filled Surfaces (DMFS) and Decayed, Missing, and Filled Teeth (DMFT) indices was carried out as well as a risk of bias assessment using the JBI tool. Results: Nine cross-sectional studies were included. In the majority of studies, non-tasters had a higher rate of dental caries, which was also evident in the results of the meta-analysis. However, four studies had a high level of bias. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this review, it may be concluded that non-tasters have a higher risk of dental caries. However, future studies should adjust for variables such as age, oral hygiene, fluoride intake, and salivary flow to improve the generalizability of these observations.

Indexed as

Dental cariesSweet tasteSystematic reviewTaste perception

Identifiers

PMID40491584
PMCPMC12145973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.