ArticleInternational journal of paediatric dentistry2025
Evaluation of near-infrared digital imaging transillumination compared with bitewing radiography for proximal caries detection in children.
Article in International journal of paediatric dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Evaluation of near-infrared digital imaging transillumination compared with bitewing radiography for proximal caries detection in children.International journal of paediatric dentistry · 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
Abstract
backgroundLimitations in traditional caries detection tools have driven the development of alternatives methods, focused on the early lesion detection such as near-infrared digital imaging transillumination (NIDIT).
aimThe aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of NIDIT compared with bitewing radiography (BWR) in the detection of interproximal carious lesions in children.
designA retrospective audit of data from children who had NIDIT, BWR and intraoral photographs was conducted. Carious lesions were scored on a tooth surface level with BWR acting as the primary reference for comparison. Accuracy was determined using multi-class area under the curve (AUC), and correlation was determined using Fleiss' Kappa.
resultsData from 499 tooth surfaces involving 44 children were included in this study. The average age across the participants was 86 months (~7 years) with an average dmft (decayed, missing and filled teeth in primary dentition) of 5.29. Multi-class AUC comparing NIDIT to BWR was 0.70. The correlation between NIDIT and BWR was moderate (0.43), whereas the correlation between photographic examination and BWR was 0.30, which is fair.
conclusionWhen compared to BWR, NIDIT showed a high specificity but a low sensitivity for proximal caries detection in primary teeth.
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.