ArticleImaging science in dentistry2023
Development and validation of a clinical phantom reproducing various lesions for oral and maxillofacial radiology research.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The objective of this study was to propose a method for developing a clinical phantom to reproduce various diseases that are clinically prevalent in the field of dentistry. This could facilitate diverse clinical research without unnecessarily exposing patients to radiation. Material and Methods: This study utilized a single dry skull, which was visually and radiographically examined to evaluate its condition. Existing lesions on the dry skull were preserved, and other relevant lesions were artificially created as necessary. These lesions were then documented using intraoral radiography and cone-beam computed tomography. Once all pre-existing and reproduced lesions were confirmed by the consensus of 2 oral and maxillofacial radiologists, the skull was embedded in a soft tissue substitute. To validate the process, cone-beam computed tomography scans and panoramic radiographs were obtained of the fabricated phantom. All acquired images were subsequently evaluated. Results: Most lesions could be identified on panoramic radiographs, although some sialoliths and cracked teeth were confirmed only through cone-beam computed tomographic images. A small gap was observed between the epoxy resin and the bone structures. However, 2 oral and maxillofacial radiologists agreed that this space did not meaningfully impact the interpretation process. Conclusion: The newly developed phantom has potential for use as a standardized phantom within the dental field. It may be utilized for a variety of imaging studies, not only for optimization purposes, but also for addressing other experimental issues related to both 2- and 3-dimensional diagnostic radiography.
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.