ArticleClinical oral investigations2024
Effects of magnification on restorative dental preparation performance: a scoping review and level of evidence mapping.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementing Deflection Loupes in Endodontic Training of General Dentistry Residents: Effects on Treatment Quality, Procedure Time and Ergonomics.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Trial
- Review
- Implantoplasty combined with soft tissue grafting for the management of complex cases: A microsurgical approach.Clinical advances in periodontics · 2026Article
- Survey on the usage and frequency of digital magnification devices in dentistry.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- A qualitative analysis of Chinese novice general dentists' perspectives on using ergonomic loupes in clinical practice.PloS one · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis scoping review aimed to identify and describe the available evidence on the effect of magnifying devices (loupe or microscope) on the performance of restorative dental preparations. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study was conducted according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for scoping reviews and registered on the INPLASY database. An electronic search was performed in four databases and Grey literature for articles published until November 2023. Eligibility criteria were determined using the PICOS strategy and comprised studies that evaluated the performance of magnification devices for restorative dental preparations. A bibliographic mapping of the evidence was conducted.
resultsSixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Most of the studies (n = 12) compared the performance of dental preparations using magnification loupes vs. no magnification. The magnification for loupes and microscopes ranged from 2.5x to 4.0x and 6.4x to 10x, respectively. The use of magnifying loupes improved the performance of restorative preparations in 66.6% of the evaluated studies. However, when the magnifications were compared, the greater magnification provided by microscopes did not improve preparation performance compared to magnification loupes. Regarding the place of publication, the American continent concentrates the most significant number of evidence.
conclusionsAlthough evidence for magnification improving the performance of dental preparations has increased over the last decade, basically only in vitro studies (most of which have taken place in the Americas) have been reported in the literature. The evidence suggests that magnification significantly improves restorative preparation performance when compared to non-magnification. However, higher magnifications (e.g., microscopes) do not appear to improve tooth preparation performance compared with lower magnification devices (e.g., magnification loupes). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Available evidence supports that using magnification can improve the performance of restored tooth preparations. However, high magnifications have no advantages over lower magnifications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39052037What 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.