Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37674608›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2023

Evaluation of Endo 10 mobile application as diagnostic tool in endodontics.

Allan Abuabara, Juliana-Pierdona de Castro, Maria-Eduarda-Nunis Locks, Ana-Paula-Testa Pezzin, Natanael-Henrique-Ribeiro Mattos, Cristiano-Miranda de Araújo, Erika-Calvano Kuchler, Flares Baratto-Filho

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Allan AbuabaraUniversity of the Region of Joinville (Univille), Joinville, Santa Catarina, Brazil.
Juliana-Pierdona de CastroTuiuti University of Paraná (UTP), Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Maria-Eduarda-Nunis LocksUniversity of the Region of Joinville (Univille), Joinville, Santa Catarina, Brazil.
Ana-Paula-Testa PezzinUniversity of the Region of Joinville (Univille), Joinville, Santa Catarina, Brazil.
Natanael-Henrique-Ribeiro MattosTuiuti University of Paraná (UTP), Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Cristiano-Miranda de AraújoTuiuti University of Paraná (UTP), Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Erika-Calvano KuchlerUniversity of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Flares Baratto-FilhoUniversity of the Region of Joinville (Univille), Joinville, Santa Catarina, Brazil.
Universidade Tuiuti do Paraná · BRUniversidade da Região de Joinville · BRUniversity of Regensburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Endodontic diagnosis can be compared to a puzzle, requiring the interpretation of a series of clinical and imaging data. Mobile health, especially mobile application (apps), can assist professionals in endodontic diagnosis. This work aims to evaluate an app - Endo 10 app, designed to assist pulpal and periapical diagnosis based on the patient's signs and symptoms and radiographic data. Material and Methods: A total of 41 dental students and dentists with different levels of expertise (10 multi-specialty clinic professors, 17 residents in endodontics and 14 dental students) were included. The System Usability Scale (SUS) was used to evaluate usability and the Davis' technology acceptance model was used to evaluate usefulness of Endo 10 app. The Mann-Whitney test was performed to compare SUS scores between professors and undergraduate dental students and to compare questions 6 and 7 of the utility test and verify whether participants who understood that the technology was useful also better understood the concepts of endodontic diagnosis. The agreement between professor's diagnosis with the app and professor without the app, and between professor and residents in endodontics with the app were evaluated. Results: The SUS score at the 50th percentile was 77.5, graded as acceptable. No significant difference was observed in the SUS scores when analyzing professors and dental students separately ( Conclusions: The Endo 10 app reached the usability and usefulness requirements. It proved accurate in diagnosing pulpal and periapical pathologies.

Identifiers

PMID37674608
PMCPMC10478192
OpenAlexW4385608878

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.