SynthesisLasers in medical science2025
Effectiveness of lasers in managing dentine hypersensitivity: an umbrella review.
Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short-term effectiveness of three agents for dentin hypersensitivity treatment: A randomized clinical trial.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- 38% silver diamine fluoride for dentine hypersensitivity treatment: anFrontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- The impact of three desensitizing materials on the shear strength between composite resin and dentin: an in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To synthesize evidence from systematic reviews evaluating the effectiveness of laser therapy in the management of dentine hypersensitivity (DH). A comprehensive search was conducted across nine databases-PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, DARE, PROSPERO, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses-from inception to June 2025. This review followed a registered PROSPERO protocol and adhered to JBI and Cochrane methodological standards. Twenty-five systematic reviews were included. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using the JBI checklist and the ROBIS tool. Overlap of primary studies was evaluated using citation matrices and the Corrected Covered Area (CCA) method. Laser therapy, either as a standalone intervention or combined with desensitizing agents, was consistently associated with short-term reduction in DH-related pain. Several high-quality reviews supported its effectiveness over placebo or no treatment. However, results were inconsistent when compared to other desensitizing agents. Only 7 reviews were rated as high quality, and most reviews had a high risk of bias, primarily due to lack of protocol registration, incomplete search strategies, and insufficient reporting of bias assessment. The CCA score of 3.9% indicated slight overlap among primary studies. Laser therapy appears to be effective for short-term relief of dentine hypersensitivity, but current evidence is limited by methodological weaknesses in existing reviews. Standardized clinical trial protocols, long-term follow-up data, and cost-effectiveness studies are essential to inform future clinical and policy decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.