Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31858481›Full record

SynthesisEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry2020

Diagnostic efficacy of cone beam computed tomography in paediatric dentistry: a systematic review.

K Horner, S Barry, M Dave, C Dixon, A Littlewood, C L Pang, A Sengupta, V Srinivasan

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 22 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Best clinical practice guidance for prescribing dental radiographs in children and adolescents: an EAPD policy document.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2020
    Pooled it
  5. A systematic review of relative indications and contra-indications for prescribing panoramic radiographs in dental paediatric patients.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) referrals in paediatric patients: A 24-month retrospective study in two radiological centers in Campinas, Brazil.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Paediatric dentist's ability to detect and diagnose dental trauma using 2D versus 3D imaging.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Guidelines for oral and maxillofacial imaging: COVID-19 considerations.Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2021
    Review
  20. Does anthropomorphic model design inDento maxillo facial radiology · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

K HornerDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Coupland Building 3, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. keith.horner@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6064-4463
S BarryDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Coupland Building 3, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
M DaveDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Coupland Building 3, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
C DixonDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Coupland Building 3, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
A LittlewoodInformation Specialist, Cochrane Oral Health, Division of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Coupland Building 3, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
C L PangDivision of Imaging, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9WL, UK.
A SenguptaDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Coupland Building 3, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
V SrinivasanPaediatric Dentistry, University Dental Hospital of Manchester, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Higher Cambridge Street, Manchester, M15 6FH, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine in which clinical situations it is indicated or contra-indicated to prescribe cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for paediatric patients.

methodsSystematic review of in vivo paediatric research studies of diagnostic efficacy using CBCT, with supplementary searches for guideline documents on CBCT and for systematic reviews permitting inclusion of ex vivo and adult studies.

resultsAfter screening, 190 publications were included, mostly case studies. No systematic reviews were found of in vivo paediatric research. Fourteen studies of diagnostic efficacy were identified. The supplementary searches found 18 guideline documents relevant to the review and 26 systematic reviews. The diagnostic efficacy evidence on CBCT was diverse and often of limited quality. There was ex vivo evidence for diagnostic accuracy being greater using CBCT than radiographs for root fractures. The multiplanar capabilities of CBCT are advantageous when localising dental structures for surgical planning. Patient movement during scanning is more common in children which could reduce diagnostic efficacy.

conclusionsNo strong recommendations on CBCT are possible, except that it should not be used as a primary diagnostic tool for caries. Guidelines on use of CBCT in the paediatric age group should be developed cautiously, taking into account the greater radiation risk and the higher economic costs compared with radiography. CBCT should only be used when adequate conventional radiographic examination has not answered the question for which imaging was required. Clinical research in paediatric patients is required at the higher levels of diagnostic efficacy of CBCT.

Indexed as

Cone-Beam Computed TomographyPediatric DentistryChildHumansCone beam computed tomographyDiagnosisPaediatric dentistryRadiography, dental

Identifiers

PMID31858481
PMCPMC7415745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.