ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Quality assessment of anterior composite restorations: clinical examination versus three digital photographic techniques.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Patient Comfort With Smartphone-Based and Intraoral Camera Imaging in Teledentistry: Observational Cross-Sectional Study.Online journal of public health informatics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was for the first time to evaluate of intraoral digital photography in assessing buccal surface of anterior composite restorations using a smartphone (iPhone 14 Pro), a smartphone with a lens (2IN1 Phone Macro Lens), and a digital camera with a macro lens (Canon Rebel XTi), compared to clinical examination, based on World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria.
methodsA total of 185 anterior composite restorations were evaluated by calibrated restorative dentistry specialists. Restorations were scored according to the FDI criteria as intact, requiring repair, or needing replacement. Clinical examination was considered the gold standard. Photographs were taken under standardized conditions, and inter-observer and inter-method agreement were analyzed using Cohen’s Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
resultsHigh inter-observer agreement was observed across all methods (Kappa = 0.928–1.0). Good to excellent agreement was found between clinical examination and digital photography methods for FDI final scores (Kappa = 0.775–0.973, p < 0.001). Photographs taken with the lens-equipped smartphone and macro camera showed higher agreement with clinical examination (Kappa = 0.973).
conclusionDigital photography, particularly with a lens-equipped smartphone and macro camera, offers effectiveness comparable to clinical examination in evaluating anterior composite restorations. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study demonstrates that intraoral digital photography, particularly with a lens-equipped smartphone and macro camera, achieves diagnostic outcomes closely aligned with clinical examination using FDI criteria. While smartphones alone are practical, lens-assisted imaging enhances accuracy, supporting its use as a cost-effective alternative to professional macro cameras.
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.