ArticleHeliyon2024
Craniomaxillofacial landmarks detection in CT scans with limited labeled data via semi-supervised learning.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical accuracy of cephalometric analysis using deep learning-based automated landmark identification on CBCT in class I and class II malocclusions.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Automatic identification of anatomical landmarks in three-dimensional computed tomography/cone-beam computed tomography: a scoping review.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Review
- Automatic identification of hard and soft tissue landmarks in cone-beam computed tomography via deep learning with diversity datasets: a methodological study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
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
Background: Three-dimensional cephalometric analysis is crucial in craniomaxillofacial assessment, with landmarks detection in craniomaxillofacial (CMF) CT scans being a key component. However, creating robust deep learning models for this task typically requires extensive CMF CT datasets annotated by experienced medical professionals, a process that is time-consuming and labor-intensive. Conversely, acquiring large volume of unlabeled CMF CT data is relatively straightforward. Thus, semi-supervised learning (SSL), leveraging limited labeled data supplemented by sufficient unlabeled dataset, could be a viable solution to this challenge. Method: We developed an SSL model, named CephaloMatch, based on a strong-weak perturbation consistency framework. The proposed SSL model incorporates a head position rectification technique through coarse detection to enhance consistency between labeled and unlabeled datasets and a multilayers perturbation method which is employed to expand the perturbation space. The proposed SSL model was assessed using 362 CMF CT scans, divided into a training set (60 scans), a validation set (14 scans), and an unlabeled set (288 scans). Result: The proposed SSL model attained a detection error of 1.60 ± 0.87 mm, significantly surpassing the performance of conventional fully supervised learning model (1.94 ± 1.12 mm). Notably, the proposed SSL model achieved equivalent detection accuracy (1.91 ± 1.00 mm) with only half the labeled dataset, compared to the fully supervised learning model. Conclusions: The proposed SSL model demonstrated exceptional performance in landmarks detection using a limited labeled CMF CT dataset, significantly reducing the workload of medical professionals and enhances the accuracy of 3D cephalometric analysis.
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.