ArticleScientific reports2023
The preliminary in vitro study and application of deep learning algorithm in cone beam computed tomography image implant recognition.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To properly repair and maintain implants, which are bone tissue implants that replace natural tooth roots, it is crucial to accurately identify their brand and specification. Deep learning has demonstrated outstanding capabilities in analysis, such as image identification and classification, by learning the inherent rules and degrees of representation of data models. The purpose of this study is to evaluate deep learning algorithms and their supporting application software for their ability to recognize and categorize three dimensional (3D) Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images of dental implants. By using CBCT technology, the 3D imaging data of 27 implants of various sizes and brands were obtained. Following manual processing, the data were transformed into a data set that had 13,500 two-dimensional data. Nine deep learning algorithms including GoogleNet, InceptionResNetV2, InceptionV3, ResNet50, ResNet50V2, ResNet101, ResNet101V2, ResNet152 and ResNet152V2 were used to perform the data. Accuracy rates, confusion matrix, ROC curve, AUC, number of model parameters and training times were used to assess the efficacy of these algorithms. These 9 deep learning algorithms achieved training accuracy rates of 100%, 99.3%, 89.3%, 99.2%, 99.1%, 99.5%, 99.4%, 99.5%, 98.9%, test accuracy rates of 98.3%, 97.5%, 94.8%, 85.4%, 92.5%, 80.7%, 93.6%, 93.2%, 99.3%, area under the curve (AUC) values of 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00. When used to identify implants, all nine algorithms perform satisfactorily, with ResNet152V2 achieving the highest test accuracy, classification accuracy, confusion matrix area under the curve, and receiver operating characteristic curve area under the curve area. The results showed that the ResNet152V2 has the best classification effect on identifying implants. The artificial intelligence identification system and application software based on this algorithm can efficiently and accurately identify the brands and specifications of 27 classified implants through processed 3D CBCT images in vitro, with high stability and low recognition cost.
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.