Fluorescence camera (FC) vs Reference standard: More advanced caries lesion detection
- Population
- Primary teeth with occlusal surfaces
- Intervention
- Fluorescence camera (FC)
- Comparison
- Reference standard
- Outcome
- More advanced caries lesion detection
Pooled specificity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=80%; no GRADE rating was reported.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Fluorescence camera (FC) vs Reference standard More advanced caries lesion detection · Primary teeth with occlusal surfaces · More advanced caries lesion threshold, Laboratory or clinical setting, FC, occlusal, primary teeth Pooled specificity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=80%; no GRADE rating was reported. Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of… (2013) All outcomes | Specificity 0.898 [0.867, 0.924] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Fluorescence camera (FC) vs Reference standard More advanced caries lesion detection · Primary teeth with occlusal surfaces · More advanced caries lesion threshold, Laboratory or clinical setting, FC, occlusal, primary teeth Pooled sensitivity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=80%; no GRADE rating was reported. Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of… (2013) All outcomes | Sensitivity 0.850 [0.702, 0.943] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes | 19 June 2012 | 75 | Not applicable |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Fluorescence camera (FC) vs Reference standard · Permanent teeth with occlusal surfaces · 1 review
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.