Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32067393›Full record

ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2020

A comparison of visual identification of dental radiographic and nonradiographic images using eye tracking technology.

Michael G Botelho, Manikandan Ekambaram, Sangeeta Y Bhuyan, Andy Wai Kan Yeung, Ray Tanaka, Michael M Bornstein, Kar Yan Li

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. AI-Assisted Diagnostics in Dentistry: An Eye-Tracking Study on User Behavior.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Michael G BotelhoProsthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4077-4716
Manikandan EkambaramPaediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Sangeeta Y BhuyanProsthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.
Andy Wai Kan YeungOral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Applied Oral Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.
Ray TanakaOral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Applied Oral Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.
Michael M BornsteinOral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Applied Oral Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.
Kar Yan LiCentralized Research Laboratories, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEye tracking has been used in medical radiology to understand observers' gaze patterns during radiological diagnosis. This study examines the visual identification ability of junior hospital dental officers (JHDOs) and dental surgery assistants (DSAs) in radiographic and nonradiographic images using eye tracking technology and examines if there is a correlation. MATERIAL AND

methodsNine JHDOs and nine DSAs examined six radiographic images and 16 nonradiographic images using eye tracking. The areas of interest (AOIs) of the radiographic images were rated as easy, medium, and hard, and the nonradiographic images were categorized as pattern recognition, face recognition, and image comparison. The participants were required to identify and locate the AOIs. Data analysis of the two domains, entire slide and AOI, was conducted by evaluating the eye tracking metrics (ETM) and the performance outcomes. ETM consisted of six parameters, and performance outcomes consisted of four parameters.

resultsNo significant differences were observed for ETMs for JHDOs and DSAs for both radiographic and nonradiographic images. The JHDOs showed significantly higher percentage in identifying AOIs than DSAs for all the radiographic images (72.7% vs. 36.4%, p = .004) and for the easy categorization of radiographic AOIs (85.7% vs. 42.9%, p = .012). JHDOs with higher correct identification percentage in face recognition had a shorter dwell time in AOIs.

conclusionsAlthough no significant relation was observed between radiographic and nonradiographic images, there were some evidence that visual recognition skills may impact certain attributes of the visual search pattern in radiographic images.

Indexed as

AdultClinical CompetenceDental AssistantsDental OfficesDentistsDiagnostic ErrorsEye MovementsEye-Tracking TechnologyFemaleHumansInternship and ResidencyMaleMiddle AgedMouthMouth DiseasesObserver Variationeye trackingface recognitiongaze analysisvisual recognition

Identifiers

PMID32067393
PMCPMC7025973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.