Comparison 1. ADMG + CAF versus SCTG +CAF ‐ short term.

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Gingival recession depth change	4	100	Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)	‐0.36 [‐1.03, 0.30]
1.1 Split‐mouth design	2	50	Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)	‐0.64 [‐2.06, 0.78]
1.2 Parallel design	2	50	Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)	‐0.10 [‐0.62, 0.43]
2 Clinical attachment level change	4	100	Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)	‐0.53 [‐1.14, 0.08]
2.1 Split‐mouth design	2	50	Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)	‐0.92 [‐1.78, ‐0.06]
2.2 Parallel design	2	50	Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)	‐0.04 [‐0.63, 0.55]
3 Keratinized tissue width change	4	100	Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)	‐0.59 [‐1.27, 0.10]
3.1 Split‐mouth design	2	50	Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)	0.07 [‐0.40, 0.53]
3.2 Parallel design	2	50	Mean Difference (Random, 95% CI)	‐1.11 [‐1.59, ‐0.63]
4 Sites with complete root coverage	2	50	Odds Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.43 [0.13, 1.37]
4.1 Parallel design	2	50	Odds Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.43 [0.13, 1.37]