Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Feb 23;10(2):e0117537.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117537. eCollection 2015.

A systematic map of systematic reviews in pediatric dentistry--what do we really know?

Ingegerd A Mejàre  1 , Gunilla Klingberg  2 , Frida K Mowafi  1 , Christina Stecksén-Blicks  3 , Svante H A Twetman  4 , Sofia H Tranæus  1
Affiliations

A systematic map of systematic reviews in pediatric dentistry--what do we really know?

Ingegerd A Mejàre et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Objectives: To identify, appraise and summarize existing knowledge and knowledge gaps in practice-relevant questions in pediatric dentistry.

Methods: A 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.

Results: Out 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.

Conclusion: There is an urgent need for primary clinical research of good quality in most clinically-relevant domains in pediatric dentistry.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Flow diagram showing the literature search strategy.
Flow diagram chart showing the literature search strategy with the number of retrieved abstracts, included and excluded articles.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Chalmers SI (2011) Systematic reviews and uncertainties about the effects of treatments [editorial] Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010 12 Available: http://www.thecochranelibrary.com/details/editorial/691951/Systematic-re.... Accessed 2015 January 10. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Clapton J, Rutter D, Sharif N (2009) Social care institute for excellence (SCIE) Systematic mapping guidance. Available: http://www.scie.org.uk/publications/researchresources/rr03.asp. Accessed 2015 January 10.
    1. Koch G, Poulsen S (2009) Pediatric dentistry: A clinical approach. Chichester: Willey-Blackwell.
    1. Petersen PE (2003) The World Oral Health Report 2003: continuous improvement of oral health in the 21st century—the approach of the WHO Global Oral Health Programme. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 31: Suppl 1:3–23. - PubMed
    1. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, et al. (2007) Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 7: 10 - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources