Table 4.
Bivariate diagnostic random-effects meta-analysis for the finally included in vivo studies for all diagnostic methods at different caries detection levels
| Meta-analytical diagnostic performance | In vivo | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caries detection level | Dentin detection level | 1/3 dentin detection level | ||
| VE | N SE (95% CI) SP (95% CI) AUC (Reitsma) DOR |
2 0.70 (0.59 − 0.80) 0.47 (0.26 − 0.70) 0.70 2.14 (0.73 − 6.28) |
- | 3 0.72 (0.52 − 0.86) 0.77 (0.67 − 0.85) 0.77 10.18 (3.94 − 26.29) |
| Conventional bitewing radiography (D-speed) |
N SE (95% CI) SP (95% CI) AUC (Reitsma) DOR |
1 0.65 (0.57 − 0.73) 0.58 (0.42 − 0.72) 0.65 2.59 (1.24 − 5.44) |
2 0.79 (0.41 − 0.96) 0.75 (0.68 − 0.82) 0.77 11.79 (2.43 − 57.24) |
- |
| Conventional bitewing radiography (E-speed) |
N SE (95% CI) SP (95% CI) AUC (Reitsma) DOR |
1 0.80 (0.71 − 0.87) 0.94 (0.46 − 0.996) 0.94 60.37 (3.31v1100.70) |
2 0.76 (0.61 − 0.87) 0.98 (0.79 − 0.998) 0.90 127.56 (7.38 − 2203.70) |
- |
| Conventional bitewing radiography (F-speed) |
N SE (95% CI) SP (95% CI) AUC (Reitsma) DOR |
- | - | - |
| Digital bitewing radiography |
N SE (95% CI) SP (95% CI) AUC (Reitsma) DOR |
- | - | - |
| LF 2095 |
N SE (95% CI) SP (95% CI) AUC (Reitsma) DOR |
1 0.88 (0.81 − 0.93) 0.71 (0.55 − 0.83) 0.88 18.33 (7.57 − 44.37) |
2 0.91 (0.86 − 0.95) 0.78 (0.46 − 0.94) 0.92 35.90 (13.43 − 96.00) |
- |
| LF pen 2190 |
N SE (95% CI) SP (95% CI) AUC (Reitsma) DOR |
- | - | - |
| Fibre-optic transillumination FOTI |
N SE (95% CI) SP (95% CI) AUC (Reitsma) DOR |
- | - | - |