Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 284

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Detection and diagnosis of the early caries lesion

Open access
Gomez, J·2015·BMC Oral Health

Abstract

The purpose of this manuscript is to discuss the current available methods to detect early lesions amenable to prevention. The current evidenced-based caries understanding, based on biological concepts, involves new approaches in caries detection, assessment, and management that should include non-cavitated lesions. Even though the importance of management of non-cavitated (NC) lesions has been recognized since the early 1900 s, dental caries has been traditionally detected at the cavitation stage, and its management has focused strongly on operative treatment. Methods of detection of early carious lesions have received significant research attention over the last 20 years. The most common method of caries detection is visual-tactile. Other non-invasive techniques for detection of early caries have been developed and investigated such as Quantitative Light-induced Fluorescence (QLF), DIAGNOdent (DD), Fibre-optic Transillumination (FOTI) and Electrical Conductance (EC). Based on previous systematic reviews, the diagnosis of NCCLs might be more accurately achieved in combination of the visual method and the use of other methods such as electrical methods and QLF for monitoring purposes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1472-6831-15-s1-s3

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 284

Metadata

Authors
Gomez, J.
Venue
BMC Oral Health
Published
2015-09-15
Volume
15
Issue
S1
Pages
S3-S3
ISSN
1472-6831 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1862977326
Cited by
284
References
3
FWCI
14.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.