SynthesisSystematic reviews2023
Color difference for shade determination with visual and instrumental methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Color Comparison Between Intraoral Scanner and Spectrophotometer Shade Matching: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2025Pooled it
- Honey as Natural Alternative to Sucrose in Biquinho-Type Pepper and Passion Fruit Mixed Jellies: Enhancing Quality and Dynamic Sensory Experience.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Multidimensional Analysis of Shade Selection Difficulty for Indirect Restorations Among Dental Students and Professionals.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- The Stain Reduction and Whitening Efficacy of an Enzyme-Enhanced Mouthwash: A Comparative Study.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2026Article
- Evaluation of VITA shade-based tooth color categories using deep learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparative Spectrophotometric Assessment of Crown Discoloration from Diverse Endodontic Sealers.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- Assessing Discrimination and Acceptance for Lightness and Chroma During Shade Selection: A Comparison of Dental and Non-Dental Professionals.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Impact of Vision Defects on Tooth Shade Selection: A Comparative of Spectrophotometry and Shade Guides in a Cross-Sectional Clinical Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of intraoral scanners and a spectrophotometer for percent correct shade identification in clinical dentistry.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- In Vitro Evaluation of the Effectiveness and pH Variation of Dental Bleaching Gels and Their Effect on Enamel Surface Roughness.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
- Article
- A comparative study of shade-matching performance using intraoral scanner, spectrophotometer, and visual assessment.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Clinical Comparative Study of Shade Measurement Using Two Methods: Dental Guides and Spectrophotometry.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- A Clinician's Perspective on the Accuracy of the Shade Determination of Dental Ceramics-A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Effect of Ceramic Thickness and Technician Variability on the Shade Duplication of Dental Ceramo-Metallic Restorations.Journal of functional biomaterials · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShade determination is a critical step for the fabrication of a satisfactory restoration. Visual shade selection with conventional shade guides is subjective and influenced by variables related to light, observer, and object. Shade selection devices have been introduced to provide subjective and quantitative shade values. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the color difference for shade selection with visual and instrumental methods.
methodsAn initial search was conducted on databases (MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) in addition to a manual search through references of identified articles. Studies comparing the accuracy of visual and instrumental shade selection based on ΔΕ were included in data synthesis. Mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the effect size for global and subgroup meta-analysis using the inverse variance weighted method and random-effects model (P ˂ 0.05). Results were presented as forest plots.
resultsThe authors identified 1776 articles from the initial search. Seven in vivo studies were included in the qualitative analysis of which six studies were included in the meta-analysis. For the global meta-analysis, the pooled mean (95% CI) was - 1.10 (- 1.92, - 0.27). Test for overall effect showed that instrumental methods were significantly more accurate than visual methods with significantly less ΔΕ (P = 0.009). Test for subgroup difference showed that the type of instrumental shade selection method used had a significant effect on accuracy (P ˂ 0.001). Instrumental methods including spectrophotometer, digital camera, and smartphone showed significantly better accuracy compared with visual shade selection (P ˂ 0.05). The greatest mean difference was found between the smartphone and visual method with a mean (95% CI) of - 2.98 (- 3.37, - 2.59) with P ˂ 0.001 followed by digital camera and spectrophotometer. There was no significant difference in accuracy between IOS and visual shade selection (P = 1.00).
conclusionsInstrumental shade selection with a spectrophotometer, digital camera, and smartphone showed significantly better shade matching compared with a conventional shade guide, whereas IOS did not improve the shade matching significantly compared with shade guides. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022356545.
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.