SynthesisDento maxillo facial radiology2024
Panoramic imaging errors in machine learning model development: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Dento maxillo facial radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for Radiographic Diagnosis of Peri-Implantitis: A Comprehensive Review on Detection, Measurement, and Risk Stratification.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Assessment of artificial intelligence in detecting errors on panoramic radiographs.Imaging science in dentistry · 2026Article
- Reducing positioning errors in panoramic radiographs: Impact of an educational video on tongue positioning.Imaging science in dentistry · 2025Article
- Automated quality evaluation of dental panoramic radiographs using deep learning.Imaging science in dentistry · 2025Article
- An Overview of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography and Dental Panoramic Radiography in Dentistry in the Community.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2024Review
- Oral Health Status and Treatment Needs Based on Artificial Intelligence (AI) Dental Panoramic Radiograph (DPR) Analysis: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the management of imaging errors from panoramic radiography (PAN) datasets used in the development of machine learning (ML) models.
methodsThis systematic literature followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and used three databases. Keywords were selected from relevant literature. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: PAN studies that used ML models and mentioned image quality concerns.
resultsOut of 400 articles, 41 papers satisfied the inclusion criteria. All the studies used ML models, with 35 papers using deep learning (DL) models. PAN quality assessment was approached in 3 ways: acknowledgement and acceptance of imaging errors in the ML model, removal of low-quality radiographs from the dataset before building the model, and application of image enhancement methods prior to model development. The criteria for determining PAN image quality varied widely across studies and were prone to bias.
conclusionsThis study revealed significant inconsistencies in the management of PAN imaging errors in ML research. However, most studies agree that such errors are detrimental when building ML models. More research is needed to understand the impact of low-quality inputs on model performance. Prospective studies may streamline image quality assessment by leveraging DL models, which excel at pattern recognition tasks.
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.