ArticleImaging science in dentistry2026
Expert consensus-based review and refinement of dental radiographic quality management and radiation safety criteria in oral and maxillofacial radiography in Korea: A Delphi study.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to establish expert consensus on dental radiographic quality management and radiation safety evaluation items published by the Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology that lacked formal consensus-based validation, while improving terminological precision and ensuring consistency across evaluation criteria. Materials and Methods: Candidate items were systematically extracted from existing evaluation checklists and guidance documents without formally established expert consensus, covering intraoral and extraoral imaging, cone-beam computed tomography, and radiation safety management. A three-round Delphi survey was conducted with eleven specialists in oral and maxillofacial radiology. Items were rated on a nine-point scale, and consensus was defined using the following criteria: a mean score of 8.0 or higher, a coefficient of variation of 0.20 or lower, and an agreement rate of 80% or higher. Qualitative feedback was iteratively analyzed to refine item wording and terminology. Results: The initial 81 items were refined and expanded to 93 items in the second round and 95 items in the third. The proportion of items achieving consensus increased from 75.3% in the first round to 83.9% in the second and 94.7% in the third. The increasing agreement rates indicated progressive convergence of expert opinion across rounds. Conclusion: This study established expert consensus-based criteria for dental radiographic quality assessment and radiation safety management, providing a validated and structured foundation for improving assessment consistency, guiding future guideline development, and supporting standardization in dental radiographic practice.
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.