Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34686815›Full record

ArticleBritish dental journal2021

The ADEPT study: a comparative study of dentists' ability to detect enamel-only proximal caries in bitewing radiographs with and without the use of AssistDent artificial intelligence software.

Hugh Devlin, Tomos Williams, Jim Graham, Martin Ashley

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Study
In one paragraph

Article in British dental journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hugh DevlinProfessor of Restorative Dentistry, Division of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, UK; Director, Manchester Imaging Ltd, UK.
Tomos WilliamsHonorary Research Assistant, Division of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, UK; Software Manager, Manchester Imaging Ltd, UK. tomos.williams@manchester.ac.uk.
Jim GrahamDirector, Manchester Imaging Ltd, UK; Honorary Reader, Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, UK.
Martin AshleyConsultant and MAHSC Honorary Professor in Restorative Dentistry and Oral Health, University Dental Hospital of Manchester, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
University of Manchester · GBUniversity Dental Hospital of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Reversal of enamel-only proximal caries by non-invasive treatments is important in preventive dentistry. However, detecting such caries using bitewing radiography is difficult and the subtle patterns are often missed by dental practitioners.Aims To investigate whether the ability of dentists to detect enamel-only proximal caries is enhanced by the use of AssistDent artificial intelligence (AI) software.Materials and methods In the ADEPT (AssistDent Enamel-only Proximal caries assessmenT) study, 23 dentists were randomly divided into a control arm, without AI assistance, and an experimental arm, in which AI assistance provided on-screen prompts indicating potential enamel-only proximal caries. All participants analysed a set of 24 bitewings in which an expert panel had previously identified 65 enamel-only carious lesions and 241 healthy proximal surfaces.Results The control group found 44.3% of the caries, whereas the experimental group found 75.8%. The experimental group incorrectly identified caries in 14.6% of the healthy surfaces compared to 3.7% in the control group. The increase in sensitivity of 71% and decrease in specificity of 11% are statistically significant (p <0.01).Conclusions AssistDent AI software significantly improves dentists' ability to detect enamel-only proximal caries and could be considered as a tool to support preventive dentistry in general practice.

Indexed as

Dental CariesDental Caries SusceptibilityArtificial IntelligenceDental EnamelDentinDentistsHumansProfessional RoleRadiography, BitewingRandom AllocationSoftware

Identifiers

PMID34686815
PMCPMC8536492
OpenAlexW3205066419

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.