Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

2 questions · 19 findings · 2 reviews

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 17 · 89.5%Very low 0 · 0%Low 2 · 10.5%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Imaging (analog or digital radiographs) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, or enhanced visual examination)

Sensitivity for detection of enamel caries · Asymptomatic children or adults suspected of enamel caries (clinical studies); extracted teeth (in vitro studies)

In the fully within-person analysis, radiographic imaging had a summary sensitivity of 0.48 (95% CrI 0.35, 0.62); ungraded.

2 findings from 1 review

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 teeth of children or…
17 findings from 1 review
Show 14 more findings