2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2004.08.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Extraoral imaging for proximal caries detection: Bitewings vs scanogram

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Observer variability is a major factor in diagnostic performance and is rarely controllable. 24 Intra-examiner agreement measurements were taken for 20% of the samples to determine examiner reliability, which was good.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Observer variability is a major factor in diagnostic performance and is rarely controllable. 24 Intra-examiner agreement measurements were taken for 20% of the samples to determine examiner reliability, which was good.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been shown that it is superior to panoramic radiography although some special acquisition mode and digital enhancement might improve the performance of it. 6 BW is also superior to pa in caries detection. 7 Results from this study show that most dentists know and practice caries detection using BW.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Unenhanced digital scanograms exhibited a statistically significant lower diagnostic accuracy than Insight film. 24 Including image manipulation and a reduction in radiation required to obtain a diagnostic image.In addition, Alkurt MT showed that the diagnostic performance of Eand F-speed films and direct digital radiography are similar for proximal caries detection. 25…”
Section: Ray-based Imaging:-intra Oral Radiography (Inr):-mentioning
confidence: 99%