ArticleImaging science in dentistry2023
Bibliometric analysis and diagnostic efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography studies published in Imaging Science in Dentistry from 2011 to 2022.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This bibliometric analysis aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the characteristics, trends, and level of diagnostic efficacy of studies on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) published in Materials and Methods: Publications related to CBCT identified in the electronic collection of ISD were selected according to eligibility criteria by 2 independent reviewers who collected data on the characteristics of the articles (year, authors, and country). The type and topic of studies were analyzed using VOSviewer v.1.6.18 (Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands). The research articles were classified according to the hierarchical scale of diagnostic efficacy. Results: Of the 236 articles included, most were from South Korea and Brazil. Bong-Hae Cho and Yun-Hoa Jung were the most prolific authors on the topic of CBCT. The most frequently published types of studies were cross-sectional and laboratory-based. The most popular topics WERE related to the diagnosis of pathologies and/or alterations, as well as anatomical variations. On the diagnostic efficacy scale, most studies were rated level 1 (technical efficacy) or 2 (diagnostic accuracy efficacy). Conclusion: A steady increase was observed in publications related to CBCT, which are of both clinical and academic interest. The trends in these publications were analyzed, revealing that most are cross-sectional studies primarily exploring the capabilities of CBCT in diagnosing pathologies and/or changes in the oral and maxillofacial complex. These studies were typically classified as level 1 or 2 on the diagnostic efficacy scale.
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.