ArticleImaging science in dentistry2020
Effect of slice inclination and object position within the field of view on the measurement accuracy of potential implant sites on cone-beam computed tomography.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2020. 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.
- Accuracy of implant height and width measurement with triaxial rotation method based on cone-beam CT.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Article
- A diagnostic accuracy study on an innovative auto-edge detection technique for identifying simulated implant fractures on radiographic images.Scientific reports · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of linear measurements in the horizontal and vertical dimensions based on object position and slice inclination in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images. MATERIALS AND
methodsTen dry sheep hemi-mandibles, each with 4 sites (incisor, canine, premolar, and molar), were evaluated when either centrally or peripherally positioned within the field of view (FOV) with the image slices subjected to either oblique or orthogonal inclinations. Four types of images were created of each region: central/cross-sectional, central/coronal, peripheral/cross-sectional, and peripheral/coronal. The horizontal and vertical dimensions were measured for each region of each image type. Direct measurements of each region were obtained using a digital caliper in both horizontal and vertical dimensions. CBCT and direct measurements were compared using the Bland-Altman plot method.
resultsThe buccolingual dimension of the incisor and premolar areas and the height of the incisor, canine, and molar areas showed statistically significant differences on the peripheral/coronal images compared to the direct measurements (
conclusionPeripheral object positioning within the FOV in combination with applying an orthogonal inclination to the slices resulted in significant inaccuracies in the horizontal and vertical measurements. The most undesirable effect was observed in the molar area and the vertical dimension.
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.