ArticleJournal of endodontics2024
Uncertainty-based Active Learning by Bayesian U-Net for Multi-label Cone-beam CT Segmentation.
Article in Journal of endodontics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uncertainty Quantification in Medical Image Segmentation: A Comprehensive Survey.Journal of imaging · 2026Review
- Review
- Detection of maxillary sinusitis of endodontic origin in cone-beam CT images using deep learning algorithms.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Impacts of artificial intelligence on computed tomography in endodontics: an integrative review.BMC oral health · 2026Review
- Modeling Ischemic Stroke Pathological Dynamics via Continuous Fields and Vector Flow.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- A Bibliometric Analysis of Artificial Intelligence Research Published in Endodontic Journals.Iranian endodontic journal · 2026Review
- AI-assisted preoperative surgical planning for dental implant.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Automated assessment of periapical health based on the radiographic periapical index using YOLOv8, YOLOv11, and YOLOv12 one-stage object detection algorithms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Leveraging Pretrained Transformers for Efficient Segmentation and Lesion Detection in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Scans.Journal of endodontics · 2024Article
- A hierarchical deep learning approach for diagnosing impacted canine-induced root resorption via cone-beam computed tomography.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Endodontics.Journal of dental research · 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionTraining of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for biomedical image analysis depends on large annotated datasets. This study assessed the efficacy of Active Learning (AL) strategies training AI models for accurate multilabel segmentation and detection of periapical lesions in cone-beam CTs (CBCTs) using a limited dataset.
methodsLimited field-of-view CBCT volumes (n = 20) were segmented by clinicians (clinician segmentation [CS]) and Bayesian U-Net-based AL strategies. Two AL functions, Bayesian Active Learning by Disagreement [BALD] and Max_Entropy [ME], were used for multilabel segmentation ("Lesion"-"Tooth Structure"-"Bone"-"Restorative Materials"-"Background"), and compared to a non-AL benchmark Bayesian U-Net function. The training-to-testing set ratio was 4:1. Comparisons between the AL and Bayesian U-Net functions versus CS were made by evaluating the segmentation accuracy with the Dice indices and lesion detection accuracy. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to assess statistically significant differences.
resultsThe final training set contained 26 images. After 8 AL iterations, lesion detection sensitivity was 84.0% for BALD, 76.0% for ME, and 32.0% for Bayesian U-Net, which was significantly different (P < .0001; H = 16.989). The mean Dice index for all labels was 0.680 ± 0.155 for Bayesian U-Net and 0.703 ± 0.166 for ME after eight AL iterations, compared to 0.601 ± 0.267 for Bayesian U-Net over the mean of all iterations. The Dice index for "Lesion" was 0.504 for BALD and 0.501 for ME after 8 AL iterations, and at a maximum 0.288 for Bayesian U-Net.
conclusionsBoth AL strategies based on uncertainty quantification from Bayesian U-Net BALD, and ME, provided improved segmentation and lesion detection accuracy for CBCTs. AL may contribute to reducing extensive labeling needs for training AI algorithms for biomedical image analysis in dentistry.
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.