Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

6 questions · 12 findings · 1 reviews · Oral Health

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 12 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Laser fluorescence (LF; DIAGNOdent) vs Reference standard

More advanced caries lesion detection · Permanent teeth with occlusal surfaces

Pooled specificity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=77%; no GRADE rating was reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LF, occlusal, permanent teeth
Specificity 0.779 [0.765, 0.794]
37 studies
GRADE not reported
Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LF, occlusal, permanent teeth
Sensitivity 0.809 [0.791, 0.827]
37 studies
GRADE not reported

Laser fluorescence (LF; DIAGNOdent) vs Reference standard

More advanced caries lesion detection · Primary teeth with occlusal surfaces

Pooled sensitivity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=23%; no GRADE rating was reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LF, occlusal, primary teeth
Sensitivity 0.672 [0.616, 0.725]
13 studies
GRADE not reported
Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LF, occlusal, primary teeth
Specificity 0.816 [0.793, 0.837]
13 studies
GRADE not reported

Laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent 2190/pen) vs Reference standard

More advanced caries lesion detection · Primary teeth with approximal surfaces

Pooled specificity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=89%; no GRADE rating was reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LFpen, approximal, primary teeth
Specificity 0.958 [0.947, 0.968]
5 studies
GRADE not reported
Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LFpen, approximal, primary teeth
Sensitivity 0.795 [0.730, 0.850]
5 studies
GRADE not reported

Laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent 2190/pen) vs Reference standard

More advanced caries lesion detection · Permanent teeth with occlusal surfaces

Pooled sensitivity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=73%; no GRADE rating was reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LFpen, occlusal, permanent teeth
Sensitivity 0.724 [0.672, 0.772]
10 studies
GRADE not reported
Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LFpen, occlusal, permanent teeth
Specificity 0.718 [0.683, 0.751]
10 studies
GRADE not reported

Laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent 2190/pen) vs Reference standard

More advanced caries lesion detection · Permanent teeth with approximal surfaces

Pooled specificity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=84%; no GRADE rating was reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LFpen, approximal, permanent teeth
Specificity 0.824 [0.761, 0.875]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LFpen, approximal, permanent teeth
Sensitivity 0.750 [0.641, 0.840]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

Laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent 2190/pen) vs Reference standard

More advanced caries lesion detection · Primary teeth with occlusal surfaces

Pooled specificity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=31%; no GRADE rating was reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LFpen, occlusal, primary teeth
Specificity 0.864 [0.834, 0.890]
5 studies
GRADE not reported
Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. 2013 All outcomes
More advanced caries lesion threshold · Laboratory or clinical setting · LFpen, occlusal, primary teeth
Sensitivity 0.831 [0.723, 0.909]
5 studies
GRADE not reported