Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32206621›Full record

ArticleImaging science in dentistry2020

Incidental findings in a consecutive series of digital panoramic radiographs.

David MacDonald, Warrick Yu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Numb Chin Sign and the Role of Radiology.International dental journal · 2025
    Article
  8. Stafne Bone Cavity: A systematic review.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The use of panoramic radiographs to address the oral health needs of vulnerable Canadian populations.Canadian journal of dental hygiene : CJDH = Journal canadien de l'hygiene dentaire : JCHD · 2024
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Incidental Pathologic Findings from Orthodontic Pretreatment Panoramic Radiographs.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

David MacDonaldDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6718-9296
Warrick YuDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0293-7628
University of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of incidental findings (IFs) on digital dental panoramic radiographs (DPRs) of asymptomatic patients attending a general dental practice. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was a retrospective study of 6,252 consecutive digital (photostimulatable phosphor) DPRs of patients who visited a Canadian general dental practice for a complete new patient examination. The IFs were grouped into dental-related anomalies, radiopacities and radiopacities in the jaws, changes in the shape of the condyles, and other findings in the jaws, such as tonsilloliths and mucosal antral pseudocysts. Their prevalence was determined.

resultsThirty-two percent of the DPRs showed at least 1 IF. The highest prevalence was found for dental-related anomalies (29% of all DPRs), of which impacted teeth were the most prevalent finding (24% of all DPRs), followed by idiopathic osteosclerosis (6% of all DPRs). A lower prevalence was noted for tonsilloliths (3%), and the prevalence of root tips, mucosal antral pseudocysts, and anomalies in condylar shape was approximately 1% each.

conclusionThe observed prevalence of 32.1% for IFs of any type underscores the need for a dental practitioner to review the entire DPR when a patient presents for an initial dental examination (or check-up) or for dental hygiene. Only a single IF (a central giant cell granuloma) provoked alarm, as it was initially considered malignant. Similarly, impacted teeth and suspected cysts need careful evaluation upon discovery to determine how they may be optimally managed.

Indexed as

Incidental FindingsJawRadiography, Panoramic

Identifiers

PMID32206621
PMCPMC7078412
OpenAlexW3011789236

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.