SynthesisJournal of clinical periodontology2025
Accuracy of Ionizing-Radiation-Based and Non-Ionizing Imaging Assessments for the Diagnosis of Periodontitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical periodontology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy of Ionizing-Radiation-Based and Non-Ionizing Imaging Assessments for the Diagnosis of Periodontitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2025Pooled it
- Using of artificial intelligence to evaluate image quality for interproximal bone level assessment on bitewing radiographs.Imaging science in dentistry · 2026Article
- A Pilot Comparative Study of Multi-Contrast Dental MRI and CBCT: Clinical Correlates of Disease Status and Inflammatory Burden in Periodontitis.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2026Article
- Diagnostic and Therapeutic Approaches in Periodontology: From Traditional Concepts to Modern Innovations.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Precision periodontology in clinical practice: bridging omics and clinical decision-making.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Review
- Ultrasound-based assessment of peri-implant mucosal thickness: an ex vivo comparative study with artificial intelligence-assisted image analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Opportunistic Assessment of Dental Pathologies in Cervical Computed Tomography Angiography: A Proof of Concept Study.Clinical neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Diagnosis in Periodontology and Implant Dentistry: The Past, the Present, the Future.Journal of periodontal research · 2026Article
- Consensus Report of the 20th European Workshop on Periodontology: Contemporary and Emerging Technologies in Periodontal Diagnosis.Journal of clinical periodontology · 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
aimsTo evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of periapical, bitewing or panoramic radiographs (standard 2D radiographs) in detecting and monitoring periodontitis (PICO 1) and to assess the clinical relevance of alternative and emerging diagnostic methods (e.g., cone-beam computed tomography [CBCT], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], ultrasound imaging [USG]) compared to standard 2D radiographs or clinical/intra-surgical examination in the diagnosis and surveillance of the disease (PICO 2). MATERIALS AND
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted through MEDLINE EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane Library. When feasible (n > 2 comparable studies), a meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy was performed.
resultsFor PICO 1, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. Pooled-data analysis from three studies showed a sensitivity of 0.77 (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.66-0.85), specificity of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.64-0.84) and accuracy of 0.82, with a diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 137.99 (95% CI: 6.99-368.90). For PICO 2, 51 articles were included dealing with different techniques. The meta-analysis for CBCT (three studies) showed a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96-1.00) and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.95-1.00), respectively, and a diagnostic accuracy of 0.99 in the detection of furcation involvement compared to intra-surgical measurements.
conclusionsStandard 2D radiographs appear to have adequate diagnostic accuracy for periodontitis, while CBCT is highly sensitive and specific to detect and classify furcation involvement. The role of non-ionizing techniques (MRI and USG) in diagnosing periodontitis remains under investigation.
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.