Same question across reviews · CL0354
unknown :: Caries detection/diagnosis -> Diagnostic accuracy
ProposalThis cluster groups questions by review type, intervention category and outcome domain. It is a proposal pending human validation, so questions in it may differ in population, comparator or timing.
Reviews
4
Questions
39
current versions
GRADE rated
0
Review overlap (CCA)
0.000
over all included studies of these reviews, not this question only
| Question | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Intervention NR Log diagnostic odds ratio · Imaging modality: Bitewing radiographs Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Log DOR 3.96 [3.20, 4.72] | 5 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Postoperative hypersensitivity · Potassium nitrate liner vs polycarboxylate cement (Hodosh et al.) Efficacy of different cavity liners compared to no cavity lining in managing deep caries in vital permanent… (2025) | Postoperative hypersensitivity reduction Significant reduction with potassium nitrate; p<0.05 (p<0.01 in subgroup section) | 1 study | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Specificity · Imaging modality: Periapical radiographs Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Specificity 0.88 [0.82, 0.93] | 12 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Log diagnostic odds ratio · Imaging modality: Panoramic radiographs Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Log DOR 5.08 [4.15, 6.02] | 8 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Sensitivity (trim-and-fill adjusted for publication bias) · Overall; trim-and-fill (20 observed + 6 imputed studies) Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Sensitivity 0.818 [0.778, 0.858] | 26 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Log diagnostic odds ratio · Imaging modality: CBCT Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Log DOR 6.33 [5.95, 6.71] | 1 study | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Sensitivity · Imaging modality: Intraoral photographic images Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Sensitivity 0.80 [0.69, 0.90] | 7 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Specificity · Imaging modality: Panoramic radiographs Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Specificity 0.97 [0.96, 0.98] | 8 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Log diagnostic odds ratio · Imaging modality: Periapical radiographs Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Log DOR 4.72 [3.16, 6.27] | 12 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Log diagnostic odds ratio (trim-and-fill adjusted for publication bias) · Overall; trim-and-fill (20 observed + 6 imputed studies) Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Log DOR 3.913 [3.219, 4.606] | 26 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Log diagnostic odds ratio · Imaging modality: Intraoral photographic images Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Log DOR 3.69 [2.80, 4.59] | 7 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Sensitivity · Imaging modality: CBCT Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Sensitivity 0.73 [0.68, 0.77] | 1 study | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Specificity · Imaging modality: Intraoral photographic images Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Specificity 0.84 [0.77, 0.91] | 7 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Sensitivity · Imaging modality: Panoramic radiographs Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Sensitivity 0.83 [0.72, 0.94] | 8 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Specificity · Imaging modality: CBCT Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Specificity 1.00 [0.99, 1.00] | 1 study | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Sensitivity · Imaging modality: Periapical radiographs Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Sensitivity 0.86 [0.83, 0.90] | 12 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Sensitivity · Imaging modality: Bitewing radiographs Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Sensitivity 0.81 [0.72, 0.91] | 5 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Specificity · Imaging modality: Bitewing radiographs Examining the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detecting dental caries across a range of… (2025) | Specificity 0.89 [0.84, 0.95] | 5 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Comparable diagnostic accuracy (photographic vs visual examination) · Overall narrative conclusion across included studies Teledentistry accuracy for caries diagnosis: a systematic review of in-vivo studies using extra-oral… (2024) | Study conclusion (narrative) 17 of 19 studies concluded photographic diagnostic accuracy comparable to visual caries assessment | 19 studies | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary sensitivity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Electrical conductance vs Fluorescence Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Sensitivity difference (95% CrI) 0.06 [-0.09, 0.18] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary specificity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Fluorescence vs Transillumination Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Specificity difference (95% CrI) 0.01 [-0.10, 0.15] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary sensitivity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Fluorescence vs Transillumination Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Sensitivity difference (95% CrI) -0.01 [-0.12, 0.13] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary sensitivity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Imaging vs Transillumination Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Sensitivity difference (95% CrI) -0.27 [-0.40, -0.12] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary specificity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Electrical conductance vs Imaging Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Specificity difference (95% CrI) -0.16 [-0.45, 0.02] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary sensitivity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Imaging vs Visual Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Sensitivity difference (95% CrI) -0.34 [-0.42, -0.23] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary sensitivity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Fluorescence vs Imaging Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Sensitivity difference (95% CrI) 0.26 [0.15, 0.37] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary sensitivity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Electrical conductance vs Visual Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Sensitivity difference (95% CrI) 0.00 [-0.17, 0.11] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary specificity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Electrical conductance vs Fluorescence Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Specificity difference (95% CrI) -0.11 [-0.40, 0.07] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary specificity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Imaging vs Transillumination Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Specificity difference (95% CrI) 0.07 [-0.03, 0.20] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary specificity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Electrical conductance vs Transillumination Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Specificity difference (95% CrI) -0.09 [-0.38, 0.12] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary specificity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Fluorescence vs Imaging Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Specificity difference (95% CrI) -0.05 [-0.14, 0.02] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary sensitivity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Electrical conductance vs Imaging Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Sensitivity difference (95% CrI) 0.33 [0.15, 0.47] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary sensitivity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Fluorescence vs Visual Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Sensitivity difference (95% CrI) -0.07 [-0.16, 0.01] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary specificity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Imaging vs Visual Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Specificity difference (95% CrI) 0.08 [0.01, 0.16] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary specificity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Transillumination vs Visual Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Specificity difference (95% CrI) 0.01 [-0.13, 0.12] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary specificity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Electrical conductance vs Visual Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Specificity difference (95% CrI) -0.08 [-0.37, 0.10] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary sensitivity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Electrical conductance vs Transillumination Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Sensitivity difference (95% CrI) 0.06 [-0.12, 0.22] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary specificity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Fluorescence vs Visual Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Specificity difference (95% CrI) 0.02 [-0.07, 0.11] | NR | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Difference in summary sensitivity (NMA, Analysis 2) · Transillumination vs Visual Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2022) | Sensitivity difference (95% CrI) -0.06 [-0.19, 0.05] | NR | Ungraded |