Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

The effect of lighting conditions on caries interpretation with a laptop computer in a clinical setting

  • Mark J. Kutcher
    ,
  • ,
  • John B. Ludlow(corresponding author)
    ,
  • Murillo Abreu
    ,
  • Enrique Platin
*Corresponding author for this work
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
    ,
  • Medical College
    ,
  • Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Research
Peer-review

Abstract

Objective: To test the null hypothesis of no difference in caries detection in dim, bright, and hooded environments for laptop viewing of intraoral radiographs. Study design: Extracted posterior teeth were imaged with posterior bite wing geometry by using storage phosphor plates. Images were displayed on a laptop computer placed in 3 lighting environments. Six dental students and 6 faculty observers scored the caries status of proximal surfaces. Responses were compared to histologic ground truth by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and other measures of accuracy. Performance was also compared to photometer-measured light levels and time spent in observation. Results: ROC AZ was significantly higher for faculty using hooded displays (0.87) than in a bright clinical environment (0.79; P = .04). Student performance was highly variable and not significantly different in any of the lighting environments. Conclusion: The ability to detect caries by experienced clinicians may be improved by hooding laptop displays in bright clinical environments.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Research
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 537-543 (7 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontics (Volume 102, Issue 4)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 10/2006

Publication status

Published - 10/2006

ISSN

1079-2104

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 33748744930
  • PubMed: 16997122

Publication metrics

Metrics

Fractional count
1
Fractional count
0.20
Fractional count
4
Fractional count
0.80
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1
Scopus
citations
SciVal
FWCI
0.22
SciVal
Author count
5
SciVal
citations
19
SciVal
Paper percentile
72

PlumX, opens in new tab

Citation count
22
Captures
36