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
In in vitro, visual examination pooled sensitivity was 0.46 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.73) for occlusal caries at the dentin detection level; ungraded.
4 findings from 1 review
Sensitivity 0.46 [0.20, 0.73]
8 studies
GRADE not reported
Specificity 0.87 [0.72, 0.95]
8 studies
GRADE not reported
DOR 5.93 [3.11, 11.31]
8 studies
GRADE not reported
Show 1 more finding
AUC 0.79
8 studies
GRADE not reported
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
In in vivo, visual examination pooled specificity was 0.77 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.85) for occlusal caries at the 1/3 dentin detection level; ungraded.
4 findings from 1 review
Specificity 0.77 [0.67, 0.85]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Sensitivity 0.72 [0.52, 0.86]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
DOR 10.18 [3.94, 26.29]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Show 1 more finding
AUC 0.77
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the 1/3 dentin caries detection level (Ekstrand; D0-2 versus D3-4) · Extracted human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars), occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces
In in vitro, visual examination pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 16.6 (95% CI 4.85 to 56.79) for occlusal caries at the 1/3 dentin detection level; ungraded.
4 findings from 1 review
DOR 16.6 [4.85, 56.79]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Specificity 0.88 [0.83, 0.92]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Sensitivity 0.69 [0.51, 0.82]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Show 1 more finding
AUC 0.89
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (1/3 dentin detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro)
Under in vitro conditions, visual examination had a pooled specificity of 0.84 (95% CI 0.76, 0.89) for proximal caries detection at the 1/3 dentin detection level; ungraded.
4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (dentin detection level) · Patients with permanent posterior teeth, proximal surfaces assessed clinically (in vivo)
Under in vivo conditions, visual examination had a pooled specificity of 0.76 (95% CI 0.11, 0.99) for proximal caries detection at the dentin detection level; ungraded.
4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding
Diagnostic accuracy for proximal caries detection (dentin detection level) · Extracted permanent posterior teeth with proximal surfaces (in vitro)
Under in vitro conditions, visual examination had a summary ROC AUC of 0.85 for proximal caries detection at the dentin detection level; ungraded.
4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding
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…
1 finding from 1 review
Specificity 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…
1 finding from 1 review
Discriminant power for caries severity: effect size (f) for microbial load (log10 CFU) between lesion categories · Patients with dentine carious lesions (deciduous/permanent teeth; children and adults)
The weighted effect size favoured hardness (f=2.62) over colour (f=0.46) for discriminating microbial load, supporting hardness as the more reliable examination (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Discriminant power for caries severity: mean difference in log10 CFU (microbial load) between lesion categories · Patients with dentine carious lesions (deciduous/permanent teeth; children and adults)
For yellow-vs-other colour compared with soft-vs-harder hardness, hardness was significantly the more discriminant test (pooled WMD -3.87, 95% CI -4.46 to -2.87; ungraded).
6 findings from 1 review
WMD -3.867 [-4.461, -2.874]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
WMD -4.446 [-5.241, -3.650]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
WMD -0.067 [-1.877, 1.743]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Show 3 more findings
Only one study (Beighton et al.) permitted this comparison: the mean log10 CFU difference was 2.32 for the colour contrast (black vs rest) versus 3.72 for the hardness contrast (soft vs medium/hard); hardness appeared…
1 study
GRADE not reported
WMD -4.741 [-4.979, -4.502]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
WMD -3.369 [-3.595, -3.143]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Transillumination/OCT device used as an adjunct to a conventional visual examination vs Reference standard: histology, or enhanced visual examination with or without radiographs (also operative excavation, tooth separation, or microcomputed tomography)
Outcome not reported · Children or adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of having enamel caries (clinical/in vivo studies); extracted teeth of…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review