Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37888733›Full record

ArticleTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)2023

Modular Neural Networks for Osteoporosis Detection in Mandibular Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Scans.

Ivars Namatevs, Arturs Nikulins, Edgars Edelmers, Laura Neimane, Anda Slaidina, Oskars Radzins, Kaspars Sudars

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence models in detecting osteoporosis using dental images: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors.

Ivars NamatevsInstitute of Electronics and Computer Science, LV-1006 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0002-5988-5558
Arturs NikulinsInstitute of Electronics and Computer Science, LV-1006 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0002-3356-4764
Edgars EdelmersInstitute of Electronics and Computer Science, LV-1006 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0001-5329-4426
Laura NeimaneDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Oral Health, Institute of Stomatology, Rīga Stradiņš University, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0002-5411-5810
Anda SlaidinaDepartment of Prosthetic Dentistry, Institute of Stomatology, Rīga Stradiņš University, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0001-8353-4187
Oskars RadzinsDepartment of Orthodontics, Institute of Stomatology, Rīga Stradiņš University, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0002-2443-9582
Kaspars SudarsInstitute of Electronics and Computer Science, LV-1006 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0002-9110-9065

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this technical note, we examine the capabilities of deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) for diagnosing osteoporosis through cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans of the mandible. The evaluation was conducted using 188 patients' mandibular CBCT images utilizing DCNN models built on the ResNet-101 framework. We adopted a segmented three-phase method to assess osteoporosis. Stage 1 focused on mandibular bone slice identification, Stage 2 pinpointed the coordinates for mandibular bone cross-sectional views, and Stage 3 computed the mandibular bone's thickness, highlighting osteoporotic variances. The procedure, built using ResNet-101 networks, showcased efficacy in osteoporosis detection using CBCT scans: Stage 1 achieved a remarkable 98.85% training accuracy, Stage 2 minimized L1 loss to a mere 1.02 pixels, and the last stage's bone thickness computation algorithm reported a mean squared error of 0.8377. These findings underline the significant potential of AI in osteoporosis identification and its promise for enhanced medical care. The compartmentalized method endorses a sturdier DCNN training and heightened model transparency. Moreover, the outcomes illustrate the efficacy of a modular transfer learning method for osteoporosis detection, even when relying on limited mandibular CBCT datasets. The methodology given is accompanied by the source code available on GitLab.

Indexed as

OsteoporosisCone-Beam Computed TomographyCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMandibleNeural Networks, Computerartificial intelligenceCBCTconvolutional neural networkdeep learningdentistryosteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID37888733
PMCPMC10611366

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.