ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of dental findings between dentists and pediatricians using intraoral scan-based teledentistry in children.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Bedside Intraoral Scanning to Reduce Procedural Burden in Older Adults With Dementia: Nonrandomized Counterbalanced Crossover Feasibility Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Remote assessment of caries, MIH, and plaque on intraoral 3D scan images: Findings from the LIFE Child study.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Three-Dimensional Intraoral Scanners in Oral Soft Tissue Diagnosis: A Narrative Review and Conceptual Outlook.Cureus · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAsynchronous transmission of health information via teledentistry offers the potential for remote diagnosis in pediatric dentistry. The aim of this study was to compare teledental findings obtained from intraoral scans (IOS) with those from conventional visual examinations (VIS) in children. Specifically, the study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of teledentistry using IOS in evaluating oral health and determining treatment needs focusing on comparisons between dentists and pediatricians.
methodsChildren (mean age 10.04 ± 2.90 years) underwent VIS during routine dental examinations. Two examiners performed the VIS, followed by digital IOS imaging of the oral cavity. Independent teledental evaluations based on the IOS data were then performed by a dentist (DEN) and a pediatrician (PED). Evaluation criteria included general dental status, presence of caries and molar incisor hypomineralization (MIH) (yes/no), restorations (yes/no; and type, if applicable), urgency of dental intervention, and treatment recommendations (no treatment, prophylaxis, follow-up, or immediate intervention). Agreement was analyzed using Gwet's AC1, Cohen's d, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC).
resultsAlmost perfect agreement (AC1 ≥ 0.81) was found for all test criteria, with two exceptions showing substantial agreement (AC1 = 0.61-0.80). Agreement values of overall dental status were 0.953/0.962 (primary dentition/permanent dentition (pD/PD)) for DEN and 0.908/0.923 for PED. Caries detection (yes/no) showed an agreement of 0.965/0.995 for DEN vs. 0.930/0.979 for PED, while restorations agreement was 0.988/0.993 (DEN) vs. 0.950/0.946 (PED). MIH assessment showed agreement of 0.996 (DEN) vs. 0.987 (PED). Cohen's d for the comparison between DEN and PED ranged from small for MIH (0.17), caries detection (0.23) and overall dental status (0.34/0.35) to large for restoration type (0.89). The clinically most relevant item "urgency of dental intervention" showed almost perfect agreement (0.903 for DEN vs. 0.878 for PED), and the final treatment recommendations showed an almost perfect to substantial agreement of 0.832 (DEN) vs. 0.775 (PED). Notably, both examiners showed similar accuracy in assessing the urgency of intervention.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates the potential of IOS-based teledentistry for pediatric dental assessments. The results indicate that pediatricians can effectively assess oral health and provide reliable treatment recommendations. This approach has the potential to increase access to dental care and to promote interdisciplinary collaboration in pediatric health care.
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.