ArticleBMC oral health2016
Comparison of occlusal caries detection using the ICDAS criteria on extracted teeth or their photographs.
Article in BMC oral health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Visual or visual-tactile examination to detect and inform the diagnosis of enamel caries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Caries Detection and Classification in Photographs Using an Artificial Intelligence-Based Model-An External Validation Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Validation of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Model for Early Childhood Caries Detection in Dental Photographs.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- ORCA-EFCD consensus report on clinical recommendation for caries diagnosis. Paper I: caries lesion detection and depth assessment.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Article
- Article
- Proof-of-Concept Study on an Automatic Computational System in Detecting and Classifying Occlusal Caries Lesions from Smartphone Color Images of Unrestored Extracted Teeth.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
- Optical magnification has no benefits on the detection of occlusal caries lesions in permanent molars using different visual scoring systems: An in vitro study.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2020Article
- The impact of ICDAS on occlusal caries treatment recommendations for high caries risk patients: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2019Article
- Comparison of micro-CT imaging and histology for approximal caries detection.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUsing photographs of occlusal surfaces instead of extracted teeth for the detection of caries can be useful in multicenter studies or education. Using a panel of observers, ICDAS scores on teeth or photographs were evaluated against the histological gold standard. The hypothesis was that both outcomes were equivalent.
methodsFour examiners with different experience in ICDAS scored photographs of occlusal surfaces of 100 extracted teeth on a monitor using ICDAS criteria. Two of the examiners had previously scored extracted teeth prior to photography. Digital images of histological sections of the teeth were observed by all examiners and consensus scores were given for each investigation site (gold standard). Kappa statistics and Spearman correlation coefficients as well as repeated measure ANOVA were performed. ROC curves were constructed for each examiner and the areas under the ROC-curves (AUC) of both scoring techniques (extracted teeth, digital images) were compared (α = 0.05).
resultsIntra- and inter-rater kappa for ICDAS on teeth were 0.81-0.94 and on photographs 0.54-0.88, respectively. Correlation with histology was 0.58- 0.61 for the teeth and 0.50-0.62 for the photographs. AUC of ICDAS scores of extracted teeth (mean 0.89) were slightly higher than those for photographs (mean 0.84). However, both AUC values were not statistically significant (p = 0.38).
conclusionUsing photographs to assess occlusal surfaces with the ICDAS criteria was not statistically different from scoring the extracted teeth.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.