Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35895591›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Is attention branch network effective in classifying dental implants from panoramic radiograph images by deep learning?

Shintaro Sukegawa, Kazumasa Yoshii, Takeshi Hara, Futa Tanaka, Katsusuke Yamashita, Tutaro Kagaya, Keisuke Nakano, Kiyofumi Takabatake, Hotaka Kawai, Hitoshi Nagatsuka and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. 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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  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

11 authors.

Shintaro SukegawaDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Kagawa Prefectural Central Hospital, Takamatsu, Kagawa, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-7986-2735
Kazumasa YoshiiDepartment of Intelligence Science and Engineering, Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology, Gifu University, Gifu, Japan.
Takeshi HaraDepartment of Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Gifu University, Gifu, Gifu, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-0235-238X
Futa TanakaDepartment of Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Gifu University, Gifu, Gifu, Japan.
Katsusuke YamashitaPolytechnic Center Kagawa, Takamatsu, Kagawa, Japan.
Tutaro KagayaDepartment of Intelligence Science and Engineering, Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology, Gifu University, Gifu, Japan.
Keisuke NakanoDepartment of Oral Pathology and Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan.
Kiyofumi TakabatakeDepartment of Oral Pathology and Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan.
Hotaka KawaiDepartment of Oral Pathology and Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan.
Hitoshi NagatsukaDepartment of Oral Pathology and Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan.
Yoshihiko FurukiDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Kagawa Prefectural Central Hospital, Takamatsu, Kagawa, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Attention mechanism, which is a means of determining which part of the forced data is emphasized, has attracted attention in various fields of deep learning in recent years. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of the attention branch network (ABN) for implant classification using convolutional neural networks (CNNs). The data consisted of 10191 dental implant images from 13 implant brands that cropped the site, including dental implants as pretreatment, from digital panoramic radiographs of patients who underwent surgery at Kagawa Prefectural Central Hospital between 2005 and 2021. ResNet 18, 50, and 152 were evaluated as CNN models that were compared with and without the ABN. We used accuracy, precision, recall, specificity, F1 score, and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve as performance metrics. We also performed statistical and effect size evaluations of the 30-time performance metrics of the simple CNNs and the ABN model. ResNet18 with ABN significantly improved the dental implant classification performance for all the performance metrics. Effect sizes were equivalent to "Huge" for all performance metrics. In contrast, the classification performance of ResNet50 and 152 deteriorated by adding the attention mechanism. ResNet18 showed considerably high compatibility with the ABN model in dental implant classification (AUC = 0.9993) despite the small number of parameters. The limitation of this study is that only ResNet was verified as a CNN; further studies are required for other CNN models.

Indexed as

Deep LearningDental ImplantsHumansNeural Networks, ComputerRadiography, PanoramicROC CurveDental Implants

Identifiers

PMID35895591
PMCPMC9328496

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.