ArticleOral radiology2025
Influence of enhancement filters on the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions in radiographs obtained with a handheld X-ray unit.
Article in Oral radiology, 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.
- Brightness and contrast adjustments influence proximal caries detection on handheld X-ray radiographs.Brazilian oral research · 2026Article
- A comparative investigation of the quality of radiographs produced by portable handheld and fixed x-ray units.Brazilian dental journal · 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
objectiveTo assess the influence of enhancement filters on the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions in radiographs obtained with a handheld X-ray unit.
methodsRadiographs of 40 human teeth exhibiting white spots or enamel discolorations were obtained with an Eagle X-ray handheld unit (Alliage, São Paulo, Brazil) configured at 2.5 mA, 60 kVp, and 0.45 s of exposure time. Two digital imaging systems (VistaScan and Digora Toto) were used for radiographic acquisition. A total of 12 enhancement filters--six available in each system--were applied to the radiographs. A total of five dentomaxillofacial radiologists blinded to the filtering condition independently evaluated the radiographs for the presence of caries lesions using a 5-point scale. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity were determined based on the examiners' responses and were compared across the filters tested using one-way analysis of variance, with a significance level of 5%. The weighted Kappa index was used to assess both intra- and inter-examiner agreements in the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions.
resultsApplying the enhancement filters tested did not influence the diagnostic metrics of proximal caries lesions in radiographs obtained using a handheld X-ray unit (p > 0.05). While the intra-examiner agreements were substantial, the inter-examiner agreements ranged from fair to moderate.
conclusionsThe enhancement filters available in the VistaScan and Digora Toto digital systems did not impact the diagnostic accuracy of proximal caries lesions in radiographs obtained using a handheld X-ray unit. Therefore, clinicians can apply these filters based on personal preference without compromising diagnostic reliability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40281140What 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.