ArticleJournal of dental research2022
Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews.
Article in Journal of dental research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- From Clinic to Community: An Interpretable Artificial Intelligence Framework for Enamel Caries Detection to Support Public Health Dentistry.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Illuminating the invisible: translational biophotonics for contemporary caries detection and biological decision-making.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Ability of BlueCheck Liquid for Detection of Initial Lesions on Occlusal Surfaces In Vitro.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Patient acceptance, time efficiency, and inter-operator agreement in intra-oral scanning with fluorescence technology for caries detection.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Observational Diagnostics: The Building Block of AI-Powered Visual Aid for Dental Practitioners.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Comparing Images from Near-Infrared Light Reflection and Bitewing Radiography to Detect Proximal Caries in Primary Teeth.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Enhancing Oral Cancer Detection: A Systematic Review of the Diagnostic Accuracy and Future Integration of Optical Coherence Tomography with Artificial Intelligence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- A Roadmap for the Rational Use of Biomarkers in Oral Disease Screening.Biomolecules · 2024Review
- Antibacterial, Antibiofilm, and Tooth Color Preservation Capacity of Magnesium Oxide Nanoparticles Varnish (in vitro Study).Nanotechnology, science and applications · 2024Article
- Caries Detection in Primary Teeth Using Intraoral Scanners Featuring Fluorescence: Protocol for a Diagnostic Agreement Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Detection and localization of caries and hypomineralization on dental photographs with a vision transformer model.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- Dielectric Characterization of Healthy Human Teeth from 0.5 to 18 GHz with an Open-Ended Coaxial Probe.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Detection and diagnosis of caries-typically undertaken through a visual-tactile examination, often with supporting radiographic investigations-is commonly regarded as being broadly effective at detecting caries that has progressed into dentine and reached a threshold where restoration is necessary. With earlier detection comes an opportunity to stabilize disease or even remineralize the tooth surface, maximizing retention of tooth tissue and preventing a lifelong cycle of restoration. We undertook a formal comparative analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of different technologies to detect and inform the diagnosis of early caries using published Cochrane systematic reviews. Forming the basis of our comparative analysis were 5 Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews evaluating fluorescence, visual or visual-tactile classification systems, imaging, transillumination and optical coherence tomography, and electrical conductance or impedance technologies. Acceptable reference standards included histology, operative exploration, or enhanced visual assessment (with or without tooth separation) as appropriate. We conducted 2 analyses based on study design: a fully within-study, within-person analysis and a network meta-analysis based on direct and indirect comparisons. Nineteen studies provided data for the fully within-person analysis and 64 studies for the network meta-analysis. Of the 5 technologies evaluated, the greatest pairwise differences were observed in summary sensitivity points for imaging and all other technologies, but summary specificity points were broadly similar. For both analyses, the wide 95% prediction intervals indicated the uncertainty of future diagnostic accuracy across all technologies. The certainty of evidence was low, downgraded for study limitations, inconsistency, and indirectness. Summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy for most technologies indicate that the degree of certitude with which a decision is made regarding the presence or absence of disease may be enhanced with the use of such devices. However, given the broad prediction intervals, it is challenging to predict their accuracy in any future "real world" context.
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.