Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35295958›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2022

Andre Luiz Ferreira Costa, Karolina A C Fardim, Jennifer M Mantoani, Ana Lucia Franco Ricardo, Maria Aparecida N Jardini, Kaan Orhan, Sérgio Lúcio Pereira de Castro Lopes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Andre Luiz Ferreira CostaPostgraduate Program in Dentistry, Cruzeiro do Sul University (UNICSUL), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4856-5417
Karolina A C FardimDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery, Science and Technology Institute, São Paulo State University, São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Jennifer M MantoaniDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery, Science and Technology Institute, São Paulo State University, São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ana Lucia Franco RicardoPostgraduate Program in Dentistry, Cruzeiro do Sul University (UNICSUL), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Maria Aparecida N JardiniDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery, Science and Technology Institute, São Paulo State University, São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Kaan OrhanDepartment of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6768-0176
Sérgio Lúcio Pereira de Castro LopesDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery, Science and Technology Institute, São Paulo State University, São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate a postprocessing filter of a new imaging-processing software for analysis of metal artifact reduction. Methods: Eight artificial edentulous mandibles (phantoms), where titanium and zirconium dioxide implants had been installed in four different regions (i.e., incisors, canine, premolars, and molars). CBCT volume was acquired, and then, four types of filters were applied to the images: BAR filter and Multi-CDT NR filter (e-Vol DX) and Sharpening Filters 1x and 2x (OnDemand). Artifact was assessed by measuring the standard deviation (SD) of the gray values of filtered and unfiltered images. The comparison between implant material, teeth, and filters was performed by using ANOVA, whereas multiple comparisons were performed by using Bonferroni's test. The level of significance adopted was 5%. Results: The results showing higher SD values, which suggests a worse image, were obtained with titanium implants compared to zirconium dioxide ones. With regard to the four filters used, it can be seen that the lowest SD values were obtained with BAR and Multi-CDT NR filters and the highest with Sharpening Filters 1x and 2x, with no statistical difference between them, except regarding the molar region in titanium implants. Conclusion: The highest SD values were seen in zirconium dioxide implants, mainly in the region of anterior teeth. The BAR filter was found to be the most effective as its SD value decreased significantly, indicating that the image quality was improved.

Indexed as

Cone-Beam Computed TomographyDental ImplantsTitaniumZirconiumArtifactsImage Processing, Computer-AssistedIn Vitro TechniquesMandiblePhantoms, ImagingDental ImplantsTitaniumZirconiumzirconium oxide

Identifiers

PMID35295958
PMCPMC8920685

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.