ArticleScientific reports2023
An efficient annotation method for image recognition of dental instruments.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metastatic Lymph Node Detection on Ultrasound Images Using YOLOv7 in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Cancers · 2024Article
- Enhancing Caries Detection in Bitewing Radiographs Using YOLOv7.Journal of digital imaging · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To prevent needlestick injury and leftover instruments, and to perform efficient dental treatment, it is important to know the instruments required during dental treatment. Therefore, we will obtain a dataset for image recognition of dental treatment instruments, develop a system for detecting dental treatment instruments during treatment by image recognition, and evaluate the performance of the system to establish a method for detecting instruments during treatment. We created an image recognition dataset using 23 types of instruments commonly used in the Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontology at Osaka University Dental Hospital and a surgeon's hands as detection targets. Two types of datasets were created: one annotated with only the characteristic parts of the instruments, and the other annotated with the entire parts of instruments. YOLOv4 and YOLOv7 were used as the image recognition system. The performance of the system was evaluated in terms of two metrics: detection accuracy (DA), which indicates the probability of correctly detecting the number of target instruments in an image, and the average precision (AP). When using YOLOv4, the mean DA and AP were 89.3% and 70.9%, respectively, when the characteristic parts of the instruments were annotated and 85.3% and 59.9%, respectively, when the entire parts of the instruments were annotated. When using YOLOv7, the mean DA and AP were 89.7% and 80.8%, respectively, when the characteristic parts of the instruments were annotated and 84.4% and 63.5%, respectively, when the entire parts of the instruments were annotated. The detection of dental instruments can be performed efficiently by targeting the parts characterizing them.
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.