Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39338799›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Comparison of Faster R-CNN, YOLO, and SSD for Third Molar Angle Detection in Dental Panoramic X-rays.

Piero Vilcapoma, Diana Parra Meléndez, Alejandra Fernández, Ingrid Nicole Vásconez, Nicolás Corona Hillmann, Gustavo Gatica, Juan Pablo Vásconez

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Revolutionizing diagnosis of pulmonaryFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Piero VilcapomaFaculty of Engineering, Universidad Andres Bello, Santiago 7500735, Chile.ORCID 0009-0002-6656-723X
Diana Parra MeléndezFaculty of Dentistry, Universidad de las Américas, Quito 170513, Ecuador.ORCID 0009-0007-0367-4536
Alejandra FernándezLaboratorio de Odontología Traslacional, Facultad de Odontología, UNAB, Santiago 7591538, Chile.ORCID 0000-0002-1970-7159
Ingrid Nicole VásconezCentro de Biotecnología Daniel Alkalay Lowitt, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Valparaiso 2390136, Chile.ORCID 0000-0001-6148-3622
Nicolás Corona HillmannLaboratorio de Odontología Traslacional, Facultad de Odontología, UNAB, Santiago 7591538, Chile.ORCID 0009-0006-4920-062X
Gustavo GaticaFaculty of Engineering, Universidad Andres Bello, Santiago 7500735, Chile.ORCID 0000-0002-1816-6856
Juan Pablo VásconezEnergy Transformation Center, Faculty of Engineering, Universidad Andres Bello, Santiago 7500971, Chile.ORCID 0000-0002-6372-7405

Funding

Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo 11240105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of artificial intelligence algorithms (AI) has gained importance for dental applications in recent years. Analyzing AI information from different sensor data such as images or panoramic radiographs (panoramic X-rays) can help to improve medical decisions and achieve early diagnosis of different dental pathologies. In particular, the use of deep learning (DL) techniques based on convolutional neural networks (CNNs) has obtained promising results in dental applications based on images, in which approaches based on classification, detection, and segmentation are being studied with growing interest. However, there are still several challenges to be tackled, such as the data quality and quantity, the variability among categories, and the analysis of the possible bias and variance associated with each dataset distribution. This study aims to compare the performance of three deep learning object detection models-Faster R-CNN, YOLO V2, and SSD-using different ResNet architectures (ResNet-18, ResNet-50, and ResNet-101) as feature extractors for detecting and classifying third molar angles in panoramic X-rays according to Winter's classification criterion. Each object detection architecture was trained, calibrated, validated, and tested with three different feature extraction CNNs which are ResNet-18, ResNet-50, and ResNet-101, which were the networks that best fit our dataset distribution. Based on such detection networks, we detect four different categories of angles in third molars using panoramic X-rays by using Winter's classification criterion. This criterion characterizes the third molar's position relative to the second molar's longitudinal axis. The detected categories for the third molars are distoangular, vertical, mesioangular, and horizontal. For training, we used a total of 644 panoramic X-rays. The results obtained in the testing dataset reached up to 99% mean average accuracy performance, demonstrating the YOLOV2 obtained higher effectiveness in solving the third molar angle detection problem. These results demonstrate that the use of CNNs for object detection in panoramic radiographs represents a promising solution in dental applications.

Indexed as

Deep LearningMolar, ThirdNeural Networks, ComputerRadiography, PanoramicAlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceHumansImage Processing, Computer-Assistedartificial intelligenceconvolutional neural networksdentistrythird molars angle detection

Identifiers

PMID39338799
PMCPMC11435645

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.