ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2025
A Study Investigating the Value of Using a Novel Mobile Application as an Adjunct to the Traditional Method of Diagnosing Periodontal Diseases.
Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeriodontal disease is a prevalent condition in the general population. An updated classification system in 2018 introduced major changes to how this disease is classified and has implications for management. Research has demonstrated challenges in reaching periodontal diagnoses with this new system, prompting the need for the development of resources to assist clinicians.
objectivesThis novel research aims to determine the level of accuracy and reliability in the assignment of case definitions of periodontal diseases according to the 2018 classification using a specialized mobile application. MATERIALS AND
methodsNewly qualified dentists were recruited and assigned five random cases to classify according to the 2018 classification system. The collected data were analyzed to determine intra- and inter-examiner accuracy and consistency.
resultsThe overall accuracy of staging was 84%. The correct grade was assigned in 96% of cases. The extent was accurate in 97%. Localized disease was more reliably diagnosed than generalized forms of the condition. When accounting for stage, grade, and extent, examiners demonstrated 76% accuracy. Inter-examiner agreement was 62.5%.
conclusionsThere was a high level of diagnostic accuracy and consistency in periodontal disease diagnosis when diagnostic software was used as an adjunct to assigning case definitions. Dedicated software like "PerioBrain" has the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy. Further research is warranted to investigate the use of this application in a clinical setting and for didactic teaching of a student cohort.
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.