Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36215971›Full record

ArticleCaries research2022

Detection of Proximal Caries Lesions on Bitewing Radiographs Using Deep Learning Method.

Xiaotong Chen, Jiachang Guo, Jiaxue Ye, Mingming Zhang, Yuhong Liang

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Caries research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06667986 (AI Rivals Traditional Bite Wing Radiography in Detecting Proximal Secondary Caries in A Group of Egyptian Patients at Cairo University, Faculty OF Dentistry Hospital), which is not on this map. Cited by 32 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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.

NCT06667986 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

AI Rivals Traditional Bite Wing Radiography in Detecting Proximal Secondary Caries in A Group of Egyptian Patients at Cairo University, Faculty OF Dentistry Hospital (Diagnostic Accuracy Study)

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorCairo UniversityRan2024 to 2026Enrolled322ConditionsCaries,DentalArmsartificial intelligence models (YOLO and Mask-RCNN)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Deep learning-based caries lesion classification of primary teeth using bitewing radiographs and its comparison with dental professionals.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. [Artificial intelligence in stomatology: Innovations in clinical practice, research, education, and healthcare management].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2025
    Review
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

5 authors.

Xiaotong ChenDepartment of Cariology and Endodontology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology and National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases and National Engineering Research of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices and Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, China.
Jiachang GuoIntelligent Healthcare Unit, Beijing Baidu Netcom Science Technology Company Limited, Beijing, China.
Jiaxue YeDepartment of Cariology and Endodontology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology and National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases and National Engineering Research of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices and Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, China.
Mingming ZhangDepartment of Cariology and Endodontology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology and National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases and National Engineering Research of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices and Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, China.
Yuhong LiangDepartment of Cariology and Endodontology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology and National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases and National Engineering Research of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices and Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the validity of a deep learning-based convolutional neural network (CNN) for detecting proximal caries lesions on bitewing radiographs. A total of 978 bitewing radiographs, 10,899 proximal surfaces, were evaluated by two endodontists and a radiologist, of which 2,719 surfaces were diagnosed and annotated with proximal caries and 8,180 surfaces were sound. The data were randomly divided into two datasets, with 818 bitewings in the training and validation dataset and 160 bitewings in the test dataset. Each annotation in the test set was then classified into 5 stages according to the extent of the lesion (E1, E2, D1, D2, D3). Faster R-CNN, a deep learning-based object detection method, was trained to detect proximal caries in the training and validation dataset and then was assessed on the test dataset. The diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated. The performance of the network in the overall and different stages of lesions was compared with that of postgraduate students on the test dataset. A total of 388 carious lesions and 1,435 sound surfaces were correctly identified by the neural network; hence, the accuracy was 0.87. Furthermore, 27.6% of lesions went undetected, and 7% of sound surfaces were misdiagnosed by the neural network. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the neural network were 0.72, 0.93, 0.77, and 0.91, respectively. In contrast with the network, 52.8% of lesions went undetected by the students, yielding a sensitivity of only 0.47. The F1-score of the students was 0.57, while the F1-score of the network was 0.74 despite the accuracy of 0.82. A significant difference in the sensitivity was found between the model and the postgraduate students when detecting different stages of lesions (p < 0.05). For early lesions which limited in enamel and the outer third of dentin, the neural network had sensitivities all above or at 0.65, while students showed sensitivities below 0.40. From our results, we conclude that the CNN may be an assistant in detecting proximal caries on bitewings.

Indexed as

Deep LearningDental CariesDental Caries SusceptibilityHumansRadiography, BitewingROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityArtificial intelligenceBitewingsCaries detectionProximal caries

Identifiers

PMID36215971
PMCPMC9932834

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.