Table 7 Grading system according to GRADEpro
From: Pain level between clear aligners and fixed appliances: a systematic review
Clear aligners compared to fixed appliances for pain | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Certainty assessment | Summary of findings | ||||||||||
No. of participants (studies) followed up | Risk of bias | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Publication bias | Overall certainty of evidence | Study event rates (%) | Relative effect (95% CI) | Anticipated absolute effects | ||
With fixed appliances | With clear aligners | Risk with fixed appliances | Risk difference with clear aligners | ||||||||
1st, 3rd, and 7th day (follow up: mean 1 days; assessed with VAS scale) | |||||||||||
336 (5 non-randomized studies) | Seriousa | Seriousa | Not serious | Very seriousb | All plausible residual confounding would reduce the demonstrated effect dose response gradient | ⨁⨁◯◯ low | 181 participants | 155 participants | Not estimable | Low | |
0 per 1.000 | |||||||||||
2nd, 4th, 5th, and 6th day (follow up: mean 1 days; assessed with VAS score) | |||||||||||
234 (3 non-randomized studies) | Seriousa | Seriousa | Not serious | Very serious | All plausible residual confounding would reduce the demonstrated effect dose response gradient | ⨁⨁◯◯ low | 110 participants | 124 participants | Not estimable | Low | |
0 per 1.000 | |||||||||||
14th day (follow up: mean 1 days; assessed with VAS score) | |||||||||||
119 (2 non-randomized studies) | Serious c | Serious c | Not serious | Very seriousb | All plausible residual confounding would reduce the demonstrated effect dose response gradient | ⨁⨁◯◯ low | 67 participants | 52 participants | Not estimable | Low | |
0 per 1.000 | |||||||||||
21st, 22nd, 23rd, 36th, and 37th day (follow up: mean 1 days; assessed with VAS score) | |||||||||||
93 (1 non-randomized study) | Not serious | Very seriousd | Not serious | Very seriousb | All plausible residual confounding would reduce the demonstrated effect dose response gradient | ⨁⨁◯◯ low | 55 participants | 38 participants | Not estimable | Low | |
0 per 1.000 | |||||||||||
24th, 25th, 26th, 27th, 35th, 38th, 39th 40th, and 41st day (follow up: mean 1 days; assessed with VAS score) | |||||||||||
93 (1 non-randomized study) | Not serious | Very seriousd | Not serious | Very seriousb | All plausible residual confounding would reduce the demonstrated effect dose response gradient | ⨁⨁◯◯ low | 55 participants | 38 participants | Not estimable | Low | |
0 per 1.000 | |||||||||||
Baseline (follow up: mean 1 days; assessed with VAS SCORE) | |||||||||||
223 (3 non-randomized studies) | Seriousa | Seriousa,c | Not serious | Very serious b | All plausible residual confounding would reduce the demonstrated effect dose response gradient | ⨁⨁◯◯ low | 121 participants | 102 participants | Not estimable | Low | |
0 per 1.000 | |||||||||||
Baseline, 1st, 2nd, 14th, 30th, 33rd, 34th, 60th, 61st, 62nd, 63rd, and 64th day (follow up: mean 1 days; assessed with VAS score) | |||||||||||
41 (1 RCT) | Not serious | Not serious | Not serious | Very seriousb | All plausible residual confounding would reduce the demonstrated effect dose response gradient | ⨁⨁⨁⨁ high | 18 participants | 23 participants | Not estimable | Low | |
0 per 1.000 | |||||||||||
3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 31st, and 32nd day (follow up: mean 1 days; assessed with VAS score) | |||||||||||
41 (1 RCT) | Not serious | Not serious | Not serious | Very seriousb | All plausible residual confounding would reduce the demonstrated effect dose response gradient | ⨁⨁⨁⨁ high | 18 participants | 23 participants | Not estimable | Low | |
0 per 1.000 | |||||||||||