evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

2 questions · 6 findings · 1 reviews · Dental caries

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 6 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Visual caries detection (ICDAS visual/visual-tactile inspection) vs Reference standard (histological validation or cavity/lesion opening; advanced = cavitated/dentin-involved lesions, all = enamel-confined initial lesions also counted)

Negative LR for detecting advanced occlusal caries · Occlusal surfaces of permanent molars (demonstrated in 12-14 year-olds; underlying diagnostic accuracy studies, mostly in vitro)

In the meta-analysis tailored to Germany, the negative lr of visual detection for advanced occlusal caries was 0.58 (95% CI 0.5 to 0.7) (ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review

Visual caries detection (ICDAS visual/visual-tactile inspection) vs Reference standard (histological validation or cavity/lesion opening; advanced = cavitated/dentin-involved lesions, all = enamel-confined initial lesions also counted)

Negative LR for detecting all (initial and advanced) occlusal caries · Occlusal surfaces of permanent molars (demonstrated in 12-14 year-olds; underlying diagnostic accuracy studies, mostly in vitro)

In the conventional (all-studies) meta-analysis, the negative lr of visual detection for all (initial and advanced) occlusal caries was 0.19 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.25) (ungraded).

3 findings from 1 review