ArticleScientific reports2022
Construction of a new automatic grading system for jaw bone mineral density level based on deep learning using cone beam computed tomography.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Using swin UNETR deep model for automated detection of alveolar bone fenestration/dehiscence in CBCT.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Can artificial intelligence optimize treatment planning and outcome prediction in fixed tooth- and implant-supported prosthodontics? A scoping review.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Integrating artificial intelligence in healthcare: applications, challenges, and future directions.Future science OA · 2025Review
- AI-driven prediction of severe respiratory sequelae in COVID-19 patients.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- A Comparison of Deep Learning vs. Dental Implantologists in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography-Based Bone Quality Classification.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- Mapping the Use of Artificial Intelligence-Based Image Analysis for Clinical Decision-Making in Dentistry: A Scoping Review.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence Application in a Case of Mandibular Third Molar Impaction: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Accuracy of dental implant placement using different dynamic navigation and robotic systems: an in vitro study.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Dental Caries Detection and Classification in CBCT Images Using Deep Learning.International dental journal · 2024Article
- Correlation between peri-implant bone mineral density and primary implant stability based on artificial intelligence classification.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The Application of Deep Learning on CBCT in Dentistry.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- A neural network-based PDE solving algorithm with high precision.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To develop and verify an automatic classification method using artificial intelligence deep learning to determine the bone mineral density level of the implant site in oral implant surgery from radiographic data obtained from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images. Seventy patients with mandibular dentition defects were scanned using CBCT. These Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine data were cut into 605 training sets, and then the data were processed with data standardization, and the Hounsfiled Unit (HU) value level was determined as follows: Type 1, 1000-2000; type 2, 700-1000; type 3, 400-700; type 4, 100-400; and type 5, - 200-100. Four trained dental implant physicians manually identified and classified the area of the jaw bone density level in the image using the software LabelMe. Then, with the assistance of the HU value generated by LabelMe, a physician with 20 years of clinical experience confirmed the labeling level. Finally, the HU mean values of various categories marked by dental implant physicians were compared to the mean values detected by the artificial intelligence model to assess the accuracy of artificial intelligence classification. After the model was trained on 605 training sets, the statistical results of the HU mean values of various categories in the dataset detected by the model were almost the same as the HU grading interval on the data annotation. This new classification provides a more detailed solution to guide surgeons to adjust the drilling rate and tool selection during preoperative decision-making and intraoperative hole preparation for oral implant surgery.
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.