SynthesisClinical oral investigations2021
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic methods for occlusal surface caries.
Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of the Uptake of Hypericin byPharmaceutics · 2026Article
- Perceived Diagnostic Value of Fluorescence-Enhanced 3D Imaging for Detecting Caries Adjacent to Restorations: A Questionnaire-Based Study.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Ability of BlueCheck Liquid for Detection of Initial Lesions on Occlusal Surfaces In Vitro.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Identifying clusters of raters with a common notion of diagnosing erosive tooth wear: a step towards improving the accuracy of diagnostic procedures.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Caries Detection and Classification in Photographs Using an Artificial Intelligence-Based Model-An External Validation Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Case Report on Caries Assessment Using Intraoral Scanner Compared with Bitewing Radiographs.European journal of dentistry · 2024Article
- Herbal medicines to prevent dental caries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Article
- ORCA-EFCD consensus report on clinical recommendation for caries diagnosis. Paper I: caries lesion detection and depth assessment.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Article
- Ozone Treatment for the Management of Caries in Primary Dentition: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies.Dentistry journal · 2024Review
- Predictive value of multiple imaging predictive models for spread through air spaces of lung adenocarcinoma: A systematic review and network meta‑analysis.Oncology letters · 2024Article
- Occlusal Caries Detection with Intraoral Scanners in Pediatric Dentistry: A Comparative Clinical Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Fluorescence and Near-Infrared Light for Detection of Secondary Caries: A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2023Review
- Detection and localization of caries and hypomineralization on dental photographs with a vision transformer model.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- The Detection of Dental Pathologies on Periapical Radiographs-Results from a Reliability Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Accuracy of different approaches for detecting proximal root caries lesions in vitro.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
- The Dentist's Ability to Detect Different Restorative Procedures on Periapical Radiographs-Results from a Reliability Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Caries Detection on Intraoral Images Using Artificial Intelligence.Journal of dental research · 2022Article
- STAndard Reporting of CAries Detection and Diagnostic Studies (STARCARDDS).Clinical oral investigations · 2022Article
- Emerging Technologies for Dentin Caries Detection-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of commonly used methods for occlusal caries diagnostics, such as visual examination (VE), bitewing radiography (BW) and laser fluorescence (LF), in relation to their ability to detect (dentin) caries under clinical and laboratory conditions. MATERIALS AND
methodsA systematic search of the literature was performed to identify studies meeting the inclusion criteria using the PIRDS concept (N = 1090). A risk of bias (RoB) assessment tool was used for quality evaluation. Reports with low/moderate RoB, well-matching thresholds for index and reference tests and appropriate reporting were included in the meta-analysis (N = 37; 29 in vivo/8 in vitro). The pooled sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and areas under ROC curves (AUCs) were computed.
resultsSP ranged from 0.50 (fibre-optic transillumination/caries detection level) to 0.97 (conventional BW/dentine detection level) in vitro. AUCs were typically higher for BW or LF than for VE. The highest AUC of 0.89 was observed for VE at the 1/3 dentin caries detection level; SE (0.70) was registered to be higher than SP (0.47) for VE at the caries detection level in vivo.
conclusionThe number of included studies was found to be low. This underlines the need for high-quality caries diagnostic studies that further provide data in relation to multiple caries thresholds. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: VE, BW and LF provide acceptable measures for their diagnostic performance on occlusal surfaces, but the results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited data in many categories.
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.