ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2024
A Clinician's Perspective on the Accuracy of the Shade Determination of Dental Ceramics-A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A Multidimensional Analysis of Shade Selection Difficulty for Indirect Restorations Among Dental Students and Professionals.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Prevalence of color vision deficiency among Saudi dentists and its effect on shade selection: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of VITA shade-based tooth color categories using deep learning.Scientific reports · 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
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNo systematic review or meta-analysis has been identified that provides a clinician's perspective on the shade selection process for ceramic restorations. The aim of the present systematic review is to find and systematize the available knowledge by referring to the methods to assess the color of dental ceramics.
methodsThe final search was performed on 10 December 2023 in six search engines. The keywords used in the search strategy were as follows: ("color matching" OR "shade matching" OR "color measurement" AND "porcelain" OR "dental ceramics") AND "dentistry" AND "accuracy".
resultsThe search strategy identified 139 potential articles. After the screening process, sixteen articles were included in the review.
conclusionsIn conclusion, the most common method, the visual method, has lower accuracy and repeatability. Devices like spectrophotometers and colorimeters provide precise, repeatable, and objective measurements, but fail to be widely applied in everyday clinical practice. Clinicians should not rely solely on their senses for shade determination, but should turn to quantitative methods. Colorimetric devices connected to mobile applications are an interesting and useful tool. Software and apps based on artificial intelligence are emerging as promising tools, but they require further research.
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.