文献类型：期刊文献

英文题名：Diagnostic accuracy of the Fonseca anamnestic index for temporomandibular disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

作者：Ma, Feihong[1];Wang, Yayuan[1];Han, Dan[2];Jia, Binkui[2];Liu, Xuehai[2];Li, Hongfan[2];Song, Zhijing[2]

第一作者：马飞宏

通信作者：Song, ZJ[1]

机构：[1]Gansu Univ Chinese Med, Affiliated Hosp, Dept Rehabil Orthoped 1, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China;[2]Gansu Univ Chinese Med, Clin Coll Tradit Chinese Med, 35 Dingxi East Rd, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China

第一机构：甘肃中医药大学第二附属医院

通信机构：[1]corresponding author), Gansu Univ Chinese Med, Clin Coll Tradit Chinese Med, 35 Dingxi East Rd, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China.|[10735ccd4a8840d96ab71]甘肃中医药大学中医临床学院;[10735]甘肃中医药大学;

年份：2026

卷号：22

期号：1

外文期刊名：HEAD & FACE MEDICINE

收录：;WOS:【SCI-EXPANDED(收录号:WOS:001759059100001)】；

基金：This work was supported by the Gansu Provincial Joint Research Fund (Grant No. 24JRRA878); the Gansu Provincial Talent Program (Grant No. 2025RCXM006); the Natural Science Foundation of Gansu Province (Grant No. 24JRRA1020); and the Key Research and Development Program of Gansu Province-International Science and Technology Cooperation Category (Grant No. 25YFWA024).

语种：英文

外文关键词：Diagnostic Accuracy; Fonseca Anamnestic Index; Temporomandibular Disorders; Systematic Review; Meta-analysis

摘要：Objective This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and performance of the Fonseca Anamnestic Index (FAI) in screening for temporomandibular disorders (TMD) through a systematic review and meta-analysis approach.
Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase from database inception to September 2025, using the keywords "Fonseca Anamnestic Index" and "temporomandibular disorders." The included studies were assessed for risk of bias using QUADAS-2 tool Threshold effects were examined with Meta-DiSc 1.4 software. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR)and area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated via Stata 15.0. Subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and publication bias assessments were also performed.
Results Out of 571 records identified, nine studies involving 2,381 patients met the inclusion criteria. Spearman
correlation coefficient for threshold effect was 0.376 (P = 0.332 > 0.05) indicating no significant threshold effect. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.89 (95% C: 0.82-0.94) and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.57-0.88), respectively. Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 3.28 (95% CI: 2.46-4.10) and 0.14(95% CI:0.07-0.27), respectively. The pooled DOR was 26.51 (95%CI: 11.66-6023), and the summary AUC was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.88-0.93). Subgroup analyses indicated no notable fluctuation in diagnostic performance across populations, regions, or sample sizes, while sensitivity analyses confirmed the stability of the results. No significant publication bias was detected by Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test (P = 0.41 > 0.05)
Conclusion The FAl exhibits high diagnostic accuracy in TMD screening and may serve as a reliable clinical adjunct tool, facilitating early detection of IMD in evidence-based practices.