ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2024
Pulse oximetry as a dental pulp test: A scoping review to identify barriers hindering the use of oximeters in clinical practice.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reference Values for Pulse Oximetry Testing in Permanent Teeth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International endodontic journal · 2026Pooled it
- Analysis of failure factors in vital pulp therapy and construction of a "three-circle intersection" framework: a retrospective study of 103 cases.Lasers in medical science · 2026Article
- Article
- A cross-sectional study of pulpal oxygen saturation in permanent incisors affected by molar incisor hypomineralisation (MIH).European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026Article
- The future of endodontic diagnosis: A narrative review focusing on biological markers.JADA foundational science · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Although medical pulse oximeters are considered effective for endodontic diagnoses, the method remains uncommon in current dental practice. The aim of the present scoping review was to investigate clinical factors that exert a negative impact on the use of pulse oximeters in dental practice. Methods: This study followed the PRISMA-ScR guidelines and the protocol was prospectively registered in the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/3GQCE). A comprehensive search of the MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases was performed in December 2022 for articles published in English or Spanish. All types of clinical studies were included, except comments, letters to the editor, and abstracts. Two independent investigators analyzed 45 full-text articles. Data extraction included general characteristics, oxygen saturation levels, and limiting factors/barriers to the use of oximeters as pulp testers. Results: The search of the databases yielded 1,300 records and 38 were included (quantitative data extraction was performed for 35 and three articles were systematic reviews). Publications were highest in number between 2016 and 2017, with an evident reduction occurring after 2021. The oxygen saturation level for sound/vital maxillary anterior teeth was 84.99% (overall mean). The main limiting factors/barriers were i) the difficulty in maintaining the two light-emitting diodes parallel during pulp tests, ii) infrared light diffraction by enamel/dentin/gingiva, and iii) the diversity of patient ages in studies. Conclusion: This scoping review encountered noteworthy findings associated with the impracticability of using medical pulse oximeters as dental pulp testers. The recent decrease in the frequency of published studies compared to approximately seven years ago may imply a negative trend in the use of the method.
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.