2012
DOI: 10.1111/cdoe.12003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evidence on existing caries risk assessment systems: are they predictive of future caries?

Abstract: The evidence on the validity for existing systems for CRA is limited. It is unknown if the identification of high-risk individuals can lead to more effective long-term patient management that prevents caries initiation and arrests or reverses the progression of lesions. There is an urgent need to develop valid and reliable methods for caries risk assessment that are based on best evidence for prediction and disease management rather than opinions of experts.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
158
1
13

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 169 publications
(177 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
5
158
1
13
Order By: Relevance
“…35 It may, however, be dubious to base a decision of operative intervention on caries risk assessment, as evidence concerning the validity of existing methods for identifying individuals at high risk is limited. 36,6 Table 3 Intrarater agreement expressed as percentage of agreement (%) and kappa with confidence interval (CI) for the assessment of caries lesion progression of approximal surfaces (n 5 65) in bitewing radiography of adolescents Raters Agreement All surfaces assessed to present progression (5,6,7,9,10,12) a Surfaces assessed to present progression within enamel (5,6,9) a Surfaces assessed to present progression in outer half of dentine (7,10,12) Numbers refer to categories presented in Figure 1.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…35 It may, however, be dubious to base a decision of operative intervention on caries risk assessment, as evidence concerning the validity of existing methods for identifying individuals at high risk is limited. 36,6 Table 3 Intrarater agreement expressed as percentage of agreement (%) and kappa with confidence interval (CI) for the assessment of caries lesion progression of approximal surfaces (n 5 65) in bitewing radiography of adolescents Raters Agreement All surfaces assessed to present progression (5,6,7,9,10,12) a Surfaces assessed to present progression within enamel (5,6,9) a Surfaces assessed to present progression in outer half of dentine (7,10,12) Numbers refer to categories presented in Figure 1.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…El porcentaje de niños clasificados correctamente como verdaderos positivos y verdaderos negativos fue 63%. La calidad de este estudio fue calificada como regular 17 .…”
Section: Holgerson Et Al 2009unclassified
“…No se proporcionaron los resultados relacionados con la sensibilidad y la especificidad de la predicción, y la falta de ajuste estadístico para los factores importantes de confusión que también podrían haber jugado un papel en el desarrollo de nuevas lesiones de caries es una de las principales limitaciones de este estudio. La calidad de este estudio fue calificado como pobre 17 .…”
Section: Domejean Et Al 2011unclassified
“…assessed 8 , as well as the heterogeneity of populations studied, study design and analysis of data 9 . Currently, the CRA should aid the clinician in treatment decisions, recall intervals in dental office and even in the awareness of the patient and/or relatives 8 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Currently, the CRA should aid the clinician in treatment decisions, recall intervals in dental office and even in the awareness of the patient and/or relatives 8 . This article seeks to evaluate the concept and caries risk factors as well as the scientific evidence about the CRA systems/guidelines described more frequently in the international literature.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%