ArticleJournal of digital imaging2022
Diagnostic Accuracy of Caries and Periapical Lesions on a Monitor with and without DICOM-GSDF Calibration Under Different Ambient Light Conditions.
Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2022. 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.
- The Hidden Variable in Radiological Accuracy: The Impact of Monitor Quality Under Real-Life Emergency Department Conditions.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Longitudinal Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy of Panoramic Radiography in Oral Pathology.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024Article
- The Detection of Dental Pathologies on Periapical Radiographs-Results from a Reliability Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of caries and periapical lesions on a monitor with and without DICOM part 14: grayscale standard display function (DICOM-GSDF) calibration under different ambient light conditions. Forty digital bitewing radiographs were selected, with or without radiographic images of carious lesions and forty digital periapical radiographs with or without periapical lesions were selected from archives of the Radiology Department at the University Hospital of the Federal University of Sergipe. The gold standard radiographic images were determined through consensus between two radiologists with more than 15 and 30 years of experience. The selected radiographs were evaluated on a LG LED monitor with and without DICOM-GSDF calibration under different ambient light conditions: Lx1 (low ambient lighting), Lx2 (moderate ambient lighting) and Lx3 (high ambient lighting). Kappa (K
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.