Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35804195›Full record

ReviewEvidence-based dentistry2022

Accuracy and effectiveness of teledentistry: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

Nalia Gurgel-Juarez, Cassius Torres-Pereira, Ana E Haddad, Lisa Sheehy, Hillel Finestone, Karen Mallet, Michael Wiseman, Kannika Hour, Heather L Flowers

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Evidence-based dentistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Factors associated with internet use to obtain oral health-related information.Canadian journal of dental hygiene : CJDH = Journal canadien de l'hygiene dentaire : JCHD · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Nalia Gurgel-JuarezSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. ngurg011@uottawa.ca.
Cassius Torres-PereiraFaculty of Dentistry, Federal University of Parana, Santa Catarina, Brazil.
Ana E HaddadFaculty of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Lisa SheehyBruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada; University of Ottawa Heart Institute Research Corporation, Ottawa, Canada.
Hillel FinestoneDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Élisabeth Bruyère Hospital, Ottawa, Canada; Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Karen MalletThe Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada; Champlain Regional Stroke Network, Ottawa, Canada.
Michael WisemanFaculty of Dentistry, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Kannika HourFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Heather L FlowersSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has urged healthcare systems to develop new ways to safely provide care. Telehealth has become a compelling alternative. Our purpose was to evaluate the accuracy and effectiveness of teledentistry for screening, diagnosis and therapeutic management of dental care in children and adults.Methods We conducted a systematic review (SR) of systematic reviews. Multiple databases, the grey literature and conference archives were searched. Eligible SRs included those reporting virtual screening, diagnostic investigations and therapeutic interventions. Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts, articles, critically appraised SRs and extracted the data.Results We identified 817 citations and included six SRs. The accepted SRs involved >7,000 participants, used primarily asynchronous communication for diagnostic/screening outcomes and used synchronous communication for treatment outcomes. SRs were of low quality and included 30 primary studies of our interest. Sensitivity and specificity for dental referrals and diagnostic treatment planning were higher than other index/reference tests, ranging from 80-88% and 73-95%, respectively. Treatment outcome measured patient compliance and professional supervision.Conclusion This SR provides the best existing evidence for clinical decision-making involving teledentistry. Current evidence supports teledentistry as an effective means for dental referrals, treatment planning and compliance and treatment viability. Asynchronous communication and the adoption of smartphones for image capturing are feasible and convenient for the implementation of teledentistry.

Identifiers

PMID35804195
PMCPMC9264296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.