ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Second Opinion for Non-Surgical Root Canal Treatment Prognosis Using Machine Learning Models.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computational Insights into Root Canal Treatment: A Survey of Selected Methods in Imaging, Segmentation, Morphological Analysis, and Clinical Management.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- AI in Root Canal Morphology: A Detailed Bibliometric Analysis of Research Trends and Global Contributions.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025Review
- Integrating Machine Learning and Deep Learning for Predicting Non-Surgical Root Canal Treatment Outcomes Using Two-Dimensional Periapical Radiographs.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Second opinion machine learning for fast-track pathway assignment in hip and knee replacement surgery: the use of patient-reported outcome measures.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Applied artificial intelligence in dentistry: emerging data modalities and modeling approaches.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Although the association between risk factors and non-surgical root canal treatment (NSRCT) failure has been extensively studied, methods to predict the outcomes of NSRCT are in an early stage, and dentists currently make the treatment prognosis based mainly on their clinical experience. Since this involves different sources of error, we investigated the use of machine learning (ML) models as a second opinion to support the clinical decision on whether to perform NSRCT. We undertook a retrospective study of 119 confirmed and not previously treated Apical Periodontitis cases that received the same treatment by the same specialist. For each patient, we recorded the variables from a newly proposed data collection template and defined a binary outcome: Success if the lesion clears and failure otherwise. We conducted tests for detecting the association between the variables and the outcome and selected a set of variables as the initial inputs into four ML algorithms: Logistic Regression (LR), Random Forest (RF), Naive-Bayes (NB), and K Nearest Neighbors (KNN). According to our results, RF and KNN significantly improve (
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.