Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38066803›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Automatized Detection of Periodontal Bone Loss on Periapical Radiographs by Vision Transformer Networks.

Helena Dujic, Ole Meyer, Patrick Hoss, Uta Christine Wölfle, Annika Wülk, Theresa Meusburger, Leon Meier, Volker Gruhn, Marc Hesenius, Reinhard Hickel and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Transformer-based models in dentistry: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

11 authors.

Helena DujicDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, 80336 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9829-4427
Ole MeyerInstitute for Software Engineering, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45127 Essen, Germany.
Patrick HossDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, 80336 Munich, Germany.
Uta Christine WölfleDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, 80336 Munich, Germany.
Annika WülkDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, 80336 Munich, Germany.
Theresa MeusburgerDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, 80336 Munich, Germany.
Leon MeierDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, 80336 Munich, Germany.
Volker GruhnInstitute for Software Engineering, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45127 Essen, Germany.
Marc HeseniusInstitute for Software Engineering, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45127 Essen, Germany.
Reinhard HickelDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, 80336 Munich, Germany.
Jan KühnischDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, 80336 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4063-2291

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several artificial intelligence-based models have been presented for the detection of periodontal bone loss (PBL), mostly using convolutional neural networks, which are the state of the art in deep learning. Given the emerging breakthrough of transformer networks in computer vision, we aimed to evaluate various models for automatized PBL detection. An image data set of 21,819 anonymized periapical radiographs from the upper/lower and anterior/posterior regions was assessed by calibrated dentists according to PBL. Five vision transformer networks (ViT-base/ViT-large from Google, BEiT-base/BEiT-large from Microsoft, DeiT-base from Facebook/Meta) were utilized and evaluated. Accuracy (ACC), sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), positive/negative predictive value (PPV/NPV) and area under the ROC curve (AUC) were statistically determined. The overall diagnostic ACC and AUC values ranged from 83.4 to 85.2% and 0.899 to 0.918 for all evaluated transformer networks, respectively. Differences in diagnostic performance were evident for lower (ACC 94.1-96.7%; AUC 0.944-0.970) and upper anterior (86.7-90.2%; 0.948-0.958) and lower (85.6-87.2%; 0.913-0.937) and upper posterior teeth (78.1-81.0%; 0.851-0.875). In this study, only minor differences among the tested networks were detected for PBL detection. To increase the diagnostic performance and to support the clinical use of such networks, further optimisations with larger and manually annotated image data sets are needed.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencedeep learningdiagnosticsmachine learningperiapical radiographsperiodontal bone lossperiodontitistransformer

Identifiers

PMID38066803
PMCPMC10706472

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.