ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2020
Optical magnification has no benefits on the detection of occlusal caries lesions in permanent molars using different visual scoring systems: An in vitro study.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of bioluminescence measurements for detection of artificial demineralization adjacent to orthodontic brackets.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2023Trial
- Feasibility of multi-class dental caries detection using deep learning-based smartphone images: a pilot prospective study.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Adoption of minimally invasive dentistry in Palestine: assessing practices and barriers - a cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSome studies have addressed the influence of optical magnification on the detection of caries lesions using a visual scoring system. However, there is a lack of research related to the use of the CAST and ADA-CCS visual scoring systems. In addition, the reliability and accuracy of ADA-CCS index in permanent teeth were not studied yet. So, the aim of this study was to evaluate, in vitro, the influence of different levels of optical magnification on the detection of occlusal caries lesions in permanent molars using three visual scoring systems. MATERIAL AND
methodsOne occlusal site per tooth was analyzed in 120 extracted permanent molars. Two trained examiners inspected the teeth using ICDAS (International Caries Detection and Assessment System), CAST (Caries Assessment Spectrum and Treatment), and ADA-CCS (American Dental Association-Caries Classification System) visual criteria, twice with each scoring system, with a one-week interval between examinations. The study was conducted in three phases: (A) without optical magnification, (B) using a binocular lens (3.5× magnification), and (C) using an operating microscope (16× magnification). Then, the teeth were sectioned longitudinally through the center of the selected site and the section with the more severe lesion was histological evaluated considering the D1 (lesions in enamel and dentin) and D3 (dentin lesions) thresholds.
resultsKappa values for intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility were good to excellent for all systems. At the D1 threshold, sensitivity, accuracy, and area under the ROC curve were high for ICDAS and CAST in all phases. However, this was not the case for the ADA-CCS in phase C (<0.05). At the D3 diagnostic threshold, there was no significant difference between the visual scoring systems during the study phases (>0.05).
conclusionsThe magnification does not improve the accuracy of the visual scoring systems in the detection of occlusal caries lesions in permanent molars.
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.