ArticleImaging science in dentistry2018
Application of portable digital radiography for dental investigations of ancient Egyptian mummies during archaeological excavations: Evaluation and discussion of the advantages and limitations of different approaches and projections.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Social strata and oral pathologies: A comparative study in two co-localized, temporally disjunct burial sites of ancient Egypt.Journal of dental sciences · 2024Article
- The importance of the nasopharynx and anterior skull base in excerebration techniques from KV40, a New Kingdom Egyptian site.Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007) · 2022Article
- [Validity of digital periapical radiography and cone beam computed tomography in the detection of peri-implant bone defects:Revista cientifica odontologica (Universidad Cientifica del Sur)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn the age of X-ray computed tomography (CT) and digital volume tomography (DVT), with their outstanding post-processing capabilities, indications for planar radiography for the study of the dentition of ancient Egyptian mummies may easily be overlooked. In this article, the advantages and limitations of different approaches and projections are discussed for planar oral and maxillofacial radiography using portable digital X-ray equipment during archaeological excavations. Furthermore, recommendations are provided regarding projections and sample positioning in this context. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 55 specimens, including 19 skeletonized mandibles, 14 skeletonized skulls, 18 separate mummified heads, and 4 partially preserved mummies were imaged using portable digital X-ray equipment in the course of archaeological excavations led by the University of Basel in the Valley of the Kings between 2009 and 2012. Images were evaluated by 2 authors with regard to the visibility of diagnostically relevant dental structures using a 4-point grading system (Likert scale).
resultsOverall, the visibility of diagnostically relevant dental structures was rated highest by both authors on X-ray images acquired using a dental detector. The tube-shift technique in the lateral projections of mandibular dentition achieved the second-best rating, and lateral projections achieved the third-best rating.
conclusionConventional planar digital X-ray imaging, due to its ubiquity, remains an excellent method-and often the only practicable one-for examining the skulls and teeth of ancient Egyptian mummies under field conditions. Radiographic images of excellent diagnostic quality can be obtained, if an appropriate methodology regarding the selected projections and sample placement is followed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.