ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021
Reject Rates of Radiographic Images in Dentomaxillofacial Radiology: A Literature Review.
Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of using different strips on reducing the most common error in panoramic imaging: A randomised controlled trial on palatoglossal air space shadow.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2024Trial
- Effectiveness of Scenario-Based Dental Hygiene Education Using Virtual Reality: Intraoral Radiography Training.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- Deliberate Error-Based Learning in Dental Radiography: An Educational Study.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Automated Segmentation of Digital Artifacts in Intraoral Photostimulable Phosphor Radiographs.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Deep learning-based assessment of periapical radiographic image quality.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Dental Radiophobia: A Narrative Review of Prevalence, Associated Factors, and Public Health Consequences of Dental Radiography Fear in the Community - With a Focus on Both Patient and Clinician-Level Fear.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2026Review
- Ideal Horizontal X-Ray Beam Angulation for Maxillary Molars. A Retrospective Clinical Study Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography.Australian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc · 2025Article
- Assessment of radiographic errors and repetition rates in undergraduate endodontic education: a retrospective clinical study.The Saudi dental journal · 2025Article
- Automated quality evaluation of dental panoramic radiographs using deep learning.Imaging science in dentistry · 2025Article
- Impact of an intraoral X-ray cone with positioning laser lights on reducing radiographic errors with the bisecting angle technique: A technical report.Imaging science in dentistry · 2025Article
- Positioning and preparation errors impacting dental panoramic radiographs in patients with mixed dentition.Imaging science in dentistry · 2024Article
- Application of Artificial Intelligence in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography for Airway Analysis: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Enhancing intraoral radiographic technique: introducing "Nallan's Lines".Frontiers in oral health · 2024Article
- Awareness and practice of dentomaxillofacial imaging among paediatric dentists: a questionnaire survey of members of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry.Oral radiology · 2023Article
- The Performance of Paralleling Technique and Bisecting Angle Technique for Taking Periapical Radiographs: A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2023Review
- The Use of CBCT in Evaluating the Health and Pathology of the Maxillary Sinus.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Content Analysis of YouTube Videos on Radiographic Anatomy on Dental Panoramic Images.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This report surveyed the image reject rates of intra-oral, extra-oral, and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging in the academic literature. PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were queried in mid-April 2021. Manual screening of the reference lists of the identified publications was performed to identify papers missed from the database search. All publications returned by the searches were initially included. Exclusion criteria included irrelevance, no reporting of reject rate, no access to the article, and not original article. The total number of images and the number of rejects were recorded for each type of radiographic images. Factors and commonest errors associated with the rejects were recorded. Twenty-six original articles were identified and reviewed. The average reject rate was 11.25% for bitewings, 16.38% for periapicals, 4.10% for panoramics, 6.08% for lateral cephalography, and 2.77% for CBCT. Positioning error and patient movement were two common reasons for the rejects. The average reject rates computed from data pooled across studies should form the reference values for quality assurance programs to follow. Future reject analysis studies should report more radiographic parameters such as type of collimation for intra-oral radiography and patient posture for CBCT.
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.