ReviewDental research journal2025
Factors influencing the accuracy of electronic apex locators: A scoping review.
Review in Dental research journal, 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.
- CBCT analysis of the apical anatomy of immature mandibular second premolars in Chinese individuals.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Article
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
Background: The aim of this scoping review (ScR) according to the population, concept, and context question outline was: What factors can affect the accuracy of electronic apex locators (EALs) (concept) when determining the root canal terminus of human permanent teeth (population) in experimental studies (context)? Materials and Methods: A ScR was performed and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews checklist using the following databases: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest. Studies that investigated the influence of a factor on the accuracy of the EALs were screened and included according to the inclusion criteria. Results: A total of 1761 records were retrieved, leading to 805 studies after duplicates were removed. Applying inclusion and exclusion criteria resulted in the inclusion of 166 studies. The 20 potential influencing factors include generation/electrical working mechanism, method for application of EALs, root canal curvature, root canal length, tooth type, maxillary sinus proximity, lateral foramen, major apical foramen diameter/file size, file alloy, apical patency, preflaring, apical periodontitis/resorption, internal root resorption, perforation, irrigants, solvents, and medicaments, pulp contents, pulp vitality, orthodontic brackets, endodontic retreatment, and electromagnetic interferences were detected. Conclusion: Although the accuracy of EALs is acceptable in most cases, the use of radiography along with EALs remains advisable to confirm the measurement in clinical scenarios.
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.