ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2022
Clinical effectiveness of high definition fluorescence camera in detection of initial occlusal caries.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough visual inspection is the preferred route in everyday clinical practise for detecting early caries lesions, novel technologies like light fluorescence-based devices (Vista Proof iX HD smart) have been developed to enhance early caries detection. MATERIAL AND
methodsOcclusal surface of 45 molar and 49 premolar teeth from 34 adult participants who fulfilled the eligibility criteria were examined by two observers using three diagnostic methods. Examination was performed visually using the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS-II) followed by Vista Proof. Fissurotomy was applied for histological validation. Intra- and inter-observer agreement were measured for ICDAS-II and light-induced fluorescence camera using Kappa test. The overall diagnostic accuracy parameters, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of the (AUC) for caries detection by Vista Poof were evaluated.
resultsFor ICDAS-II and Vista Proof methods, there was almost perfect intra- and inter-observer agreement. Based on ICDAS-II as a reference standard 1, Vista Proof showed a low level of agreement in enamel carious lesion detection with low sensitivity value of 48%, high specificity of 100%, and AUC was 0.112, while a high level of agreement in dentin carious lesion detection with high sensitivity value of 100%, low specificity of 48% and AUC was 0.888. Based on fissurotomy as reference standard 2, Vista Proof showed a high level of agreement in dentin carious lesion detection with high sensitivity value of 95% and 0% specificity and AUC was 0.814.
conclusionsQuantitative light-induced fluorescence camera with reference to ICDAS-II is considered as an accurate diagnostic modality for detection of early occlusal caries. Histological findings validate the diagnostic accuracy of the camera in dentin.
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.