Gap finder

Search review questions

Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.

Limit to evidence status or GRADE (optional)

515 questions in 19 reviews · cluster CL0076

current versions
No studies 19 · 3.7%Ungraded 449 · 87.2%Very low 17 · 3.3%Low 23 · 4.5%Moderate 7 · 1.4%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Intervention categories, outcome domains and clusters are a proposed key pending human validation. Clear all filters

QuestionEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Remote screening of the oral cavity (mobile application/telemedicine) vs Reference standard: examination and clinical evaluation by a physician/clinician with specialist knowledge or training (long-term follow-up accepted for those screened negative)
Sensitivity for detection of oral cavity cancer/OPMD · Apparently healthy adults not reporting symptoms of OPMD or OSCC, attending an organised screening or surveillance…
Clinical assessment for the detection of oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in… (2021) · Cochrane
Summary of findings 4 (no pooled analysis): sensitivity 0.85 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.88), 0.82 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.96), and 0.94 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.00) across the 3 studies. Prevalence 12.2% to 30.9%. Certainty VERY LOW.3 studies · 3600 participantsVery low
Conventional bitewing radiography, D-speed film vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (dentin detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · Dentin detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
Specificity 0.99 [0.96, 0.999]1 studyUngraded
Digital bitewing radiography, sensor-based (CCD/CMOS) vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (caries detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · Caries detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
DOR 5.01 [2.83, 8.88]12 studiesUngraded
Visual examination (VE) vs Cavity preparation or biopsy (operative validation)
Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the caries detection level (D0 versus D1-D4) · Human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars) in patients, occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic methods for occlusal surface caries. (2021)
AUC 0.702 studiesUngraded
Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)
Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Permanent dentition (non-CBCT)
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.90 [0.85, 0.93]NRUngraded
Conventional bitewing radiography, F-speed film vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (dentin detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · Dentin detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
Sensitivity 0.42 [0.29, 0.56]3 studiesUngraded
Conventional bitewing radiography (E-speed film) vs Histological validation (serial sectioning, grinding, hemisection, or microradiography)
Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the dentin caries detection level (D0-2 versus D3-4) · Extracted human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars), occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic methods for occlusal surface caries. (2021)
Sensitivity 0.48 [0.21, 0.77]2 studiesUngraded
Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)
Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Dentine-caries (D3) prevalence low <15% (non-CBCT)
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Sensitivity 0.36 [0.25, 0.47]NRUngraded
Digital bitewing radiography, sensor-based (CCD/CMOS) vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (dentin detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · Dentin detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
DOR 12.84 [6.56, 25.13]4 studiesUngraded
Visual examination (VE) vs Histological validation (serial sectioning, grinding, hemisection, or microradiography)
Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the dentin caries detection level (D0-2 versus D3-4) · Extracted human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars), occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic methods for occlusal surface caries. (2021)
Sensitivity 0.46 [0.20, 0.73]8 studiesUngraded
CarieScan Pro device vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual examination (with or without radiographs)
Sensitivity · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
Electrical conductance for the detection of dental caries (2021) · Cochrane
CarieScan Pro (3 studies, 244 tooth surfaces): sensitivity ranged from 0.55 to 0.91. No evidence of a difference in accuracy by device type (Chi2=0.05, df=1, P=0.82).3 studiesUngraded
Digital bitewing radiography, phosphor plate (PSP) vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (caries detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · Caries detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
AUC 0.8211 studiesUngraded
Conventional bitewing radiography, E-speed film vs Direct visual examination after tooth separation or bioptical cavity preparation
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (dentin detection level) · Patients with permanent posterior teeth, proximal surfaces assessed clinically (in vivo) · Dentin detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
Specificity 0.91 [0.80, 0.96]1 studyUngraded
Analogue (conventional) radiographs vs Digital radiographs (direct within-person / paired comparison); reference standard: histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination
Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Analogue
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.91 [0.86, 0.94]15 studiesUngraded
Fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI) vs Histological validation (serial sectioning, grinding, hemisection, or microradiography)
Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the dentin caries detection level (D0-2 versus D3-4) · Extracted human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars), occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic methods for occlusal surface caries. (2021)
Specificity 0.97 [0.89, 0.994]2 studiesUngraded
Visual or visual-tactile classification systems (any system: ICDAS, ERK, Nyvad, Downer, Lussi, UniViSS, or unspecified) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)
Specificity for detection of enamel caries · Asymptomatic children or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Histology reference standard
Visual or visual‐tactile examination to detect and inform the diagnosis of enamel caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.76 [0.69, 0.81]NRUngraded
Oral cytology (e.g. brush cytology, OralCDx brush biopsy) vs Surgical or punch biopsy with histological assessment
Sensitivity · 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
Sensitivity 0.90 [0.82, 0.94]20 studiesModerate
Analogue (conventional) radiographs vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)
Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.90 [0.86, 0.93]51 studiesUngraded
Conventional bitewing radiography, D-speed film vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (caries detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · Caries detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
DOR 5.2 [1.6, 16.8]2 studiesUngraded
Visual or visual-tactile classification systems (any system: ICDAS, ERK, Nyvad, Downer, Lussi, UniViSS, or unspecified) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)
Sensitivity for detection of enamel caries · Asymptomatic children or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Occlusal surface
Visual or visual‐tactile examination to detect and inform the diagnosis of enamel caries (2021) · Cochrane
Sensitivity 0.87 [0.82, 0.90]NRUngraded
Visual examination (VE) vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (caries detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · Caries detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
Sensitivity 0.64 [0.42, 0.81]9 studiesUngraded
Fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI) / digital fibre-optic transillumination (DIFOTI) vs Reference standard: histology, or enhanced visual examination with or without radiographs (also operative excavation, tooth separation, or microcomputed tomography)
Sensitivity for detection of enamel/early caries · Children or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of having enamel caries (clinical/in vivo studies);… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo; in vitro no limit if stored appropriately)
Transillumination and optical coherence tomography for the detection and diagnosis of enamel caries (2021) · Cochrane
Sensitivity 0.47 [0.35, 0.59]8 studiesUngraded
Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)
Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Sensitivity analysis: low risk of bias for index test
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.88 [0.82, 0.92]NRUngraded
Electrical conductance devices (electronic caries monitor (ECM) and/or CarieScan Pro), used as an adjunct to clinical oral examination vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual examination (with or without radiographs)
Outcome NR · Children/adolescents/adults or extracted teeth; target condition = non-cavitated enamel caries on SMOOTH tooth surfaces. · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
Electrical conductance for the detection of dental caries (2021) · Cochrane
No eligible studies. All included studies assessed occlusal surfaces only; smooth surfaces were a planned surface subgroup with no data.0 studiesNo studies
Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)
Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Reference standard: excavation (non-CBCT)
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Sensitivity 0.51 [0.27, 0.74]5 studiesUngraded
Electrical conductance devices (electronic caries monitor (ECM) and/or CarieScan Pro), used as an adjunct to clinical oral examination vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual examination (with or without radiographs)
Specificity · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Permanent dentition
Electrical conductance for the detection of dental caries (2021) · Cochrane
Permanent dentition (4 studies): specificity ranged from 0.73 to 1.00.4 studiesUngraded
Conventional bitewing radiography (D-speed film) vs Cavity preparation or biopsy (operative validation)
Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the dentin caries detection level (D0-2 versus D3-4) · Human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars) in patients, occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic methods for occlusal surface caries. (2021)
Sensitivity 0.79 [0.41, 0.96]2 studiesUngraded
Digital bitewing radiography, sensor-based (CCD/CMOS) vs Direct visual examination after tooth separation or bioptical cavity preparation
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (caries detection level) · Patients with permanent posterior teeth, proximal surfaces assessed clinically (in vivo) · Caries detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
Specificity 0.93 [0.77, 0.98]1 studyUngraded
Conventional bitewing radiography, F-speed film vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (1/3 dentin detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · 1/3 dentin detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
AUC 0.981 studyUngraded
Visual examination (VE) vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (caries detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · Caries detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
DOR 11.49 [5.19, 25.46]9 studiesUngraded
Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)
Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Dentine-caries (D3) prevalence high >=35% or unreported (non-CBCT)
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.89 [0.82, 0.93]NRUngraded
Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)
Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Analogue and digital combined (non-CBCT); 97 datasets
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Sensitivity 0.46 [0.40, 0.51]NRUngraded
Electrical conductance devices (electronic caries monitor (ECM) and/or CarieScan Pro), used as an adjunct to clinical oral examination vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual examination (with or without radiographs)
Sensitivity (test accuracy for detecting enamel caries) · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
Electrical conductance for the detection of dental caries (2021) · Cochrane
SoF findings (HSROC; no summary operating point reported): 'ECM: sensitivity from 0.61 to 0.98 ... CarieScan Pro: sensitivity from 0.55 to 0.91'. Across all 7 studies (8 datasets), covering 719 tooth surfaces or sites…7 studiesVery low
Conventional bitewing radiography, F-speed film vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (1/3 dentin detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · 1/3 dentin detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
Sensitivity 0.54 [0.36, 0.70]1 studyUngraded
Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)
Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Setting: in vitro (non-CBCT)
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.89 [0.84, 0.92]NRUngraded
COE with vital rinsing (toluidine blue/tolonium chloride) vs Conventional oral examination (COE) alone
Specificity (COE plus vital rinsing arm) · OSCC or OPMD symptom-free individuals with tobacco habits
Clinical assessment for the detection of oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in… (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.91 [0.90, 0.91]1 study · 4080 participantsModerate
Analogue (conventional) radiographs vs Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) (direct within-person / paired comparison); reference standard: histology
Diagnostic accuracy: analogue versus CBCT (within-person, not pooled) · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Direct comparison analogue vs CBCT (within-person): 6 datasets from 3 studies (737 tooth sites or surfaces) provided data, but the results could not be pooled; only individual study results are shown (Figure 21). No…3 studiesUngraded
Visual or visual-tactile classification systems (any system: ICDAS, ERK, Nyvad, Downer, Lussi, UniViSS, or unspecified) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)
Diagnostic accuracy: in vitro versus in vivo comparison · Asymptomatic children or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Study setting (in vitro vs in vivo)
Visual or visual‐tactile examination to detect and inform the diagnosis of enamel caries (2021) · Cochrane
Pre-specified in vitro versus in vivo comparison was not completed because 49 of the 60 histology studies were in vitro; a sensitivity analysis removing the in vivo studies confirmed a minimal change to summary…NRUngraded
COE with light-based detection (e.g. ViziLite Plus, Microlux/DL, VELscope, Identafi 3000) vs COE with vital rinsing (toluidine blue/tolonium chloride)
Outcome NR · Apparently healthy adults not reporting symptoms of OPMD or OSCC, attending an organised screening or surveillance…
Clinical assessment for the detection of oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in… (2021) · Cochrane
No eligible studies; planned comparative analysis (COE with vital rinse vs COE with light-based detection) not populated in this version.0 studiesNo studies
Conventional bitewing radiography, E-speed film vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (caries detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · Caries detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
Specificity 0.90 [0.84, 0.93]9 studiesUngraded
Visual examination (VE) vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (1/3 dentin detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · 1/3 dentin detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
Specificity 0.84 [0.76, 0.89]1 studyUngraded
Digital bitewing radiography (phosphor plates) vs Histological validation (serial sectioning, grinding, hemisection, or microradiography)
Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the dentin caries detection level (D0-2 versus D3-4) · Extracted human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars), occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic methods for occlusal surface caries. (2021)
Specificity 0.95 [0.59, 0.995]2 studiesUngraded
Analogue (conventional) radiographs vs Digital radiographs (direct within-person / paired comparison); reference standard: histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination
Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Digital
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.88 [0.83, 0.92]15 studiesUngraded
Visual or visual-tactile classification systems (any system: ICDAS, ERK, Nyvad, Downer, Lussi, UniViSS, or unspecified) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)
Specificity for detection of enamel caries · Asymptomatic children or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
Visual or visual‐tactile examination to detect and inform the diagnosis of enamel caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.77 [0.72, 0.82]67 studiesLow
Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)
Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Dentine-caries (D3) prevalence high >=35% or unreported (non-CBCT)
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Sensitivity 0.50 [0.40, 0.59]NRUngraded
Electronic caries monitor (ECM) device (ECM II / ECM III / ECM IV) vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual examination (with or without radiographs)
Sensitivity · Children, adolescents, or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of early enamel caries (in vivo), or… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies)
Electrical conductance for the detection of dental caries (2021) · Cochrane
ECM (4 studies, 475 tooth surfaces): sensitivity ranged from 0.61 to 0.98 (0.61-0.65 in three studies; 0.98 in the most recent ECM IV study). No evidence of a difference in accuracy by device type (Chi2=0.05, df=1,…4 studiesUngraded
Visual examination (VE) vs Cavity preparation or biopsy (operative validation)
Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the 1/3 dentin caries detection level (Ekstrand; D0-2 versus D3-4) · Human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars) in patients, occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic methods for occlusal surface caries. (2021)
Specificity 0.77 [0.67, 0.85]3 studiesUngraded
Conventional bitewing radiography, E-speed film vs Histological validation of dental tissues (gold standard)
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (caries detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro) · Caries detection level
Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies of proximal surface caries. (2021)
AUC 0.829 studiesUngraded
Radiographic imaging methods (any: analogue radiographs, digital radiographs, or CBCT) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)
Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Proximal surfaces (non-CBCT)
Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.89 [0.84, 0.93]NRUngraded
Visual or visual-tactile classification systems (any system: ICDAS, ERK, Nyvad, Downer, Lussi, UniViSS, or unspecified) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)
Specificity for detection of enamel caries · Asymptomatic children or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children… · Up to 3 months between index test and reference standard (in vivo studies), Occlusal surface
Visual or visual‐tactile examination to detect and inform the diagnosis of enamel caries (2021) · Cochrane
Specificity 0.74 [0.66, 0.81]NRUngraded