Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38373931›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2024

Application of deep learning and feature selection technique on external root resorption identification on CBCT images.

Nor Hidayah Reduwan, Azwatee Abdul Aziz, Roziana Mohd Razi, Erma Rahayu Mohd Faizal Abdullah, Seyed Matin Mazloom Nezhad, Meghna Gohain, Norliza Ibrahim

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Comparative evaluation of ChatGPT and Gemini in detecting external apical root resorption on panoramic radiographs of orthodontic patients : Artificial intelligence performance in detecting root resorption.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nor Hidayah ReduwanDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia.
Azwatee Abdul AzizDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia.
Roziana Mohd RaziDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontic, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia.
Erma Rahayu Mohd Faizal AbdullahDepartment of Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia. erma@um.edu.my.
Seyed Matin Mazloom NezhadDepartment of Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia.
Meghna GohainDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia.
Norliza IbrahimDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia. norlizaibrahim@um.edu.my.
University of Malaya · MY

Funding

Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) FP121-2020/FRGS/1/2020/SKK0/UM/02/23
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArtificial intelligence has been proven to improve the identification of various maxillofacial lesions. The aim of the current study is two-fold: to assess the performance of four deep learning models (DLM) in external root resorption (ERR) identification and to assess the effect of combining feature selection technique (FST) with DLM on their ability in ERR identification.

methodsExternal root resorption was simulated on 88 extracted premolar teeth using tungsten bur in different depths (0.5 mm, 1 mm, and 2 mm). All teeth were scanned using a Cone beam CT (Carestream Dental, Atlanta, GA). Afterward, a training (70%), validation (10%), and test (20%) dataset were established. The performance of four DLMs including Random Forest (RF) + Visual Geometry Group 16 (VGG), RF + EfficienNetB4 (EFNET), Support Vector Machine (SVM) + VGG, and SVM + EFNET) and four hybrid models (DLM + FST: (i) FS + RF + VGG, (ii) FS + RF + EFNET, (iii) FS + SVM + VGG and (iv) FS + SVM + EFNET) was compared. Five performance parameters were assessed: classification accuracy, F1-score, precision, specificity, and error rate. FST algorithms (Boruta and Recursive Feature Selection) were combined with the DLMs to assess their performance.

resultsRF + VGG exhibited the highest performance in identifying ERR, followed by the other tested models. Similarly, FST combined with RF + VGG outperformed other models with classification accuracy, F1-score, precision, and specificity of 81.9%, weighted accuracy of 83%, and area under the curve (AUC) of 96%. Kruskal Wallis test revealed a significant difference (p = 0.008) in the prediction accuracy among the eight DLMs.

conclusionIn general, all DLMs have similar performance on ERR identification. However, the performance can be improved by combining FST with DLMs.

Indexed as

Deep LearningRoot ResorptionSpiral Cone-Beam Computed TomographyArtificial IntelligenceCone-Beam Computed TomographyHumansArtificial intelligenceClassificationCone beam computed tomographyDeep learningExternal root resorptionFeature selection technique

Identifiers

PMID38373931
PMCPMC10875886
OpenAlexW4391949002

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.