Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34294759›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Clinically applicable artificial intelligence system for dental diagnosis with CBCT.

Matvey Ezhov, Maxim Gusarev, Maria Golitsyna, Julian M Yates, Evgeny Kushnerev, Dania Tamimi, Secil Aksoy, Eugene Shumilov, Alex Sanders, Kaan Orhan

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 84 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
23.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

84 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 167 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Educational Applications of ChatGPT in University-Based Dental Education. A Systematic Review.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Artificial Intelligence in Endodontics-A Bibliometric Analysis.Australian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Matvey EzhovDiagnocat Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Maxim GusarevDiagnocat Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Maria GolitsynaDiagnocat Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Julian M YatesDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Evgeny KushnerevDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Dania TamimiPrivate Practice, Orlando, FL, USA.
Secil AksoyDepartment of DentoMaxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Near East University, Nicosia, Cyprus.
Eugene ShumilovDiagnocat Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Alex SandersDiagnocat Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Kaan OrhanDepartment of DentoMaxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, 06500, Ankara, Turkey. call53@yahoo.com.
University of Manchester · GBAnkara University · TRNear East University · CYOrlando Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, a novel AI system based on deep learning methods was evaluated to determine its real-time performance of CBCT imaging diagnosis of anatomical landmarks, pathologies, clinical effectiveness, and safety when used by dentists in a clinical setting. The system consists of 5 modules: ROI-localization-module (segmentation of teeth and jaws), tooth-localization and numeration-module, periodontitis-module, caries-localization-module, and periapical-lesion-localization-module. These modules use CNN based on state-of-the-art architectures. In total, 1346 CBCT scans were used to train the modules. After annotation and model development, the AI system was tested for diagnostic capabilities of the Diagnocat AI system. 24 dentists participated in the clinical evaluation of the system. 30 CBCT scans were examined by two groups of dentists, where one group was aided by Diagnocat and the other was unaided. The results for the overall sensitivity and specificity for aided and unaided groups were calculated as an aggregate of all conditions. The sensitivity values for aided and unaided groups were 0.8537 and 0.7672 while specificity was 0.9672 and 0.9616 respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups (p = 0.032). This study showed that the proposed AI system significantly improved the diagnostic capabilities of dentists.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCone-Beam Computed TomographyDisease ManagementHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedObserver VariationSensitivity and SpecificityStomatognathic Diseases

Identifiers

PMID34294759
PMCPMC8298426
OpenAlexW3185779390

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.