Question · asked by 1 review
Light-based detection and/or oral spectroscopy (e.g. ViziLite, VELscope, Microlux DL, Identafi 3000) vs Surgical or punch biopsy with histological assessment: Specificity
- Population
- Adults (aged 16 years or over) presenting to primary or secondary care with clinically evident suspicious or innocuous oral lesions
- Intervention
- Light-based detection and/or oral spectroscopy (e.g. ViziLite, VELscope, Microlux DL, Identafi 3000)
- Comparison
- Surgical or punch biopsy with histological assessment
- Outcome
- Specificity
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Light-based detection and/or oral spectroscopy (e.g. ViziLite, VELscope, Microlux DL, Identafi 3000) vs Surgical or punch biopsy with histological assessment Specificity · Adults (aged 16 years or over) presenting to primary or secondary care with clinically evident suspicious or innocuous… Diagnostic tests for oral cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients presenting with clinically… (2021) · Cochrane All outcomes | Specificity 0.50 [0.32, 0.68] | 23 studies | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Diagnostic tests for oral cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients presenting with clinically evident lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2020-10-20 | Not listed | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Light-based detection and/or oral spectroscopy (e.g. ViziLite, VELscope, Microlux DL, Identafi 3000) vs Scalpel, punch or fine needle aspiration biopsy with histological diagnosis · Adults (aged 16 years or over) presenting with clinically evident oral lesions · 0 reviews
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.