SynthesisClinical and experimental dental research2026
Comparative Diagnostic Performance of Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry for Low Bone Density Assessment. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative Diagnostic Performance of Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry for Low Bone Density Assessment. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Pooled it
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
objectiveThis systematic review evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of CBCT for BMD assessment using DEXA as the reference standard and aimed to quantify its performance through meta-analysis. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis review included prospective and retrospective observational studies assessing CBCT's diagnostic performance in detecting low BMD, with DEXA as the reference. Searches in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus identified 13 eligible studies involving adult participants (≥ 18 years). Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality using the QUADAS-2 tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models.
resultsPooled sensitivity and specificity of CBCT for detecting low BMD were 0.58 (95% CI: 0.50-0.67) and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69-0.86), respectively. The summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.69-0.77), indicating moderate diagnostic accuracy. Subgroup analyses revealed heterogeneity influenced by sample size and anatomical site.
conclusionCBCT demonstrates moderate diagnostic accuracy in detecting low BMD, with better specificity than sensitivity. While promising, standardization of CBCT protocols and larger studies are needed to confirm its role in clinical assessment. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: (CRD42024598958).
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.