What do systematic reviews say?

2 questions · 2 findings · 2 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 2 · 100%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) vs Reference standard

detection of proximal caries · primary teeth with proximal caries

No eligible in vitro studies of primary teeth with proximal caries were found.

1 finding from 1 review

Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative light-induced fluorescence in detecting caries of various types and locations: a… 2025 All outcomes
in vitro · primary dentition
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found

Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) vs Histological validation (in vitro) or cavity preparation/biopsy (in vivo)

Occlusal caries detection accuracy · Human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars) in patients, occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces

No eligible QLF studies met the meta-analysis inclusion criteria (candidate QLF studies were identified but none had acceptable index/reference tests and reporting quality).

1 finding from 1 review

Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic methods for occlusal surface caries. 2021 All outcomes
in vitro and in vivo
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found