ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Development and Validation of an Ultrasonography-Based Machine Learning Model for Predicting Outcomes of Bruxism Treatments.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- B-mode ultrasound radiomics of the masseter muscle for differentiating individuals with and without clinically defined probable bruxism.Oral radiology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Sleep Bruxism Detection: A Technical Pipeline Synthesis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A machine learning approach to predict treatment response in myofascial pain patients receiving masseter trigger point injections.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Predicting fracture risk in Y-TZP zirconia implants using radiomics-based artificial intelligence.BMC oral health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesWe aimed to develop a predictive model for the outcome of bruxism treatments using ultrasonography (USG)-based machine learning (ML) techniques. This study is a quantitative research study (predictive modeling study) in which different treatment methods applied to bruxism patients are evaluated through artificial intelligence. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study population comprised 102 participants with bruxism in three treatment groups: Manual therapy, Manual therapy and Kinesio Tape or Botulinum Toxin-A injection. USG imaging was performed on the masseter muscle to calculate muscle thickness, and pain thresholds were evaluated using an algometer. A radiomics platform was utilized to handle imaging and clinical data, as well as to perform a subsequent radiomics statistical analysis.
resultsThe area under the curve (AUC) values of all machine learning methods ranged from 0.772 to 0.986 for the training data and from 0.394 to 0.848 for the test data. The Support Vector Machine (SVM) led to excellent discrimination between bruxism and normal patients from USG images. Radiomics characteristics in pre-treatment ultrasound scans of patients, showing coarse and nonuniform muscles, were associated with a greater chance of less effective pain reduction outcomes.
conclusionsThis study has introduced a machine learning model using SVM analysis on ultrasound (USG) images for bruxism patients, which can detect masseter muscle changes on USG. Support Vector Machine regression analysis showed the combined ML models can also predict the outcome of the pain reduction.
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.