ArticleCureus2024
Classification of Periapical and Bitewing Radiographs as Periodontally Healthy or Diseased by Deep Learning Algorithms.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence in periapical radiography: a systematic review.Odontology · 2026Pooled it
- Deep Learning for the Assessment of Alveolar Bone Loss on Intraoral Radiographs: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Fractal Analysis and Artificial Intelligence for Radiographic Detection of Periodontal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Segmentation-Based Multi-Class Detection and Radiographic Charting of Periodontal and Restorative Conditions on Bitewing Radiographs Using Deep Learning.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Applicability and performance of convolutional neural networks for the identification of periodontal bone loss in periapical radiographs: a scoping review.Oral radiology · 2026Article
- Detection of Fractured Endodontic Instruments in Periapical Radiographs: A Comparative Study of YOLOv8 and Mask R-CNN.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Precision Medicine Assessment of the Radiographic Defect Angle of the Intrabony Defect in Periodontal Lesions by Deep Learning of Bitewing Radiographs.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Application of artificial intelligence-based detection of furcation involvement in mandibular first molar using cone beam tomography images- a preliminary study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Utilizing Deep Learning for Diagnosing Radicular Cysts.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives The aim of this artificial intelligence (AI) study was to develop a deep learning algorithm capable of automatically classifying periapical and bitewing radiography images as either periodontally healthy or unhealthy and to assess the algorithm's diagnostic success. Materials and methods The sample of the study consisted of 1120 periapical radiographs (560 periodontally healthy, 560 periodontally unhealthy) and 1498 bitewing radiographs (749 periodontally healthy, 749 periodontally ill). From the main datasets of both radiography types, three sub-datasets were randomly created: a training set (80%), a validation set (10%), and a test set (10%). Using these sub-datasets, a deep learning algorithm was developed with the YOLOv8-cls model (Ultralytics, Los Angeles, California, United States) and trained over 300 epochs. The success of the developed algorithm was evaluated using the confusion matrix method. Results The AI algorithm achieved classification accuracies of 75% or higher for both radiograph types. For bitewing radiographs, the sensitivity, specificity, precision, accuracy, and F1 score values were 0.8243, 0.7162, 0.7439, 0.7703, and 0.7821, respectively. For periapical radiographs, the sensitivity, specificity, precision, accuracy, and F1 score were 0.7500, 0.7500, 0.7500, 0.7500, and 0.7500, respectively. Conclusion The AI models developed in this study demonstrated considerable success in classifying periodontal disease. Future applications may involve employing AI algorithms for assessing periodontal status across various types of radiography images and for automated disease detection.
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.