Study designs of evaluations included in the review
For the review of diagnosis, primary studies or systematic reviews were eligible for inclusion.
For the review of treatment, primary studies of any design and of at least 1 year in duration were eligible for inclusion.
Specific interventions included in the review
Studies evaluating diagnostic tests of, or treatments for, root caries were eligible for inclusion. The diagnostic tests evaluated were radiographic appearance of root surfaces, macroscopic examination, tactile sense with an explorer, clinical examination and colour of lesions. The included treatments were methods of remineralisation or restoration of root caries lesions.
Reference standard test against which the new test was compared
There were no inclusion criteria relating to a reference standard for the diagnostic studies. Comparisons of diagnostic categories with one or more independent assessments were eligible for inclusion. The reference standards used by the included studies were described as clinical not histopathology', bacterial sampling or microbial profile of lesions, or were not reported.
Participants included in the review
Studies of adults with root caries were eligible for inclusion. For the review of diagnosis, studies of adult patients with true caries over a range of disease (sound to diseased) were eligible for inclusion.
Outcomes assessed in the review
For the review of diagnosis, no explicit inclusion criteria relating to the outcomes were reported. The outcomes reported were data to calculate the sensitivity and specificity and reliability.
For the review of treatment, studies that used valid diagnostic and outcome criteria were eligible for inclusion. The outcomes reported were the number of reversed, arrested, remineralised, inactive or hardening lesions, and the retention number intact with no further decay.
How were decisions on the relevance of primary studies made?
At least two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts. Potentially relevant articles addressing each review question were then sought using the search function of the reference management programme. It was not stated whether this selection was conducted by more than one reviewer.