Question · asked by 1 review
Dental imaging (analog or digital radiographs) vs Visual classification: Difference in sensitivity
- Population
- Asymptomatic children or adults suspected of enamel caries (clinical studies); extracted teeth (in vitro studies)
- Intervention
- Dental imaging (analog or digital radiographs)
- Comparison
- Visual classification
- Outcome
- Difference in sensitivity
Imaging had lower sensitivity than visual classification in the fully within-person analysis.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Dental imaging (analog or digital radiographs) vs Visual classification Difference in sensitivity · Children or adults asymptomatic or suspected of enamel caries; extracted teeth · Clinical studies and in vitro extracted teeth, Analysis 1: fully within-person comparison Imaging had lower sensitivity than visual classification in the fully within-person analysis. Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. (2021) All outcomes | Difference in sensitivity -0.34 [-0.49, -0.17] | 19 studies · 2849 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enamel Caries Detection and Diagnosis: An Analysis of Systematic Reviews. 2022 All outcomes | Not specified | Not listed | Not applicable |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.