ArticleDental research journal2024
Comparison of periapical parallel radiography with cbct with different field of views (FOV) for the detection of periapical lesions.
Article in Dental research journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative assessment of CBCT and digital radiography in quantifying periapical pathology (in vitro study).BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Is apical periodontitis a matter of microbial diversity or time? A scoping review.Head & face medicine · 2026Article
- Radiographic and cone-beam computed tomography characterization of Chevron lucency in 82 clinically healthy maxillary canine teeth of dogs: a retrospective descriptive study.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic apical periodontitis (AP) may influence the outcome of root canal treatment. Thus, it is important to diagnose AP using the best method available. This research was done to compare the diagnostic accuracy of parallel periapical radiography (PR) and different field of views (FOVs) of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: This Results: The quantitative scores were compared with the gold standard using ICC, which showed maximum agreement for the dental FOV of CBCT (93.3) and minimum agreement for PR (62.5) ( Conclusion: CBCT with dental FOV presents the highest sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy for detection and characterization of simulated AP.
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.