ReviewEuropean oral research2026
Prevalence of gingival recession in university students: a systematic review.
Review in European oral research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This systematic review aims to comprehensively assess the prevalence, extent, severity, and distribution of gingival recession (GR) among university students. Recognizing that GR rep-resents a significant periodontal concern with aesthetic and functional consequences, this review focuses on a young demographic that is underrepresented in epidemiological surveys. Materials and methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines and a pre-registered protocol, a structured search strategy was designed and executed across PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and EBSCO databa-ses, targeting studies published over the last 20 years. Eligibility was defined using the PICO framework: Population: university students; Intervention/Exposure: presence of GR; Comparison: absence of GR; Outcome: prevalence rates. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklists were used to assess methodological quality and risk of bias across various study designs, including cross-sectional, cohort, case-control, and randomized controlled trials. Results: Out of 299 initially identified articles, nine met the inclusion criteria, encompassing a total of 1,619 participants. The design of the included studies revealed considerable heterogeneity in sampling, measurement methods, and reported prevalence, which ranged widely from 29.4% to 82.6%. Risk factors linked to GR included age, gender, oral hygiene practices, brushing technique and force, occlusal interferences, and anatomical factors. Conclusion: This systematic review demonstrates a high prevalence of gingival recession among university students, underscoring the importance of targeted preventive strategies and educational interventions in this population. Future well-designed longitudinal studies are needed to clarify causality and inform tailored prevention programs.
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.