ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2024
Diagnostic yield of dental radiography and digital tomosynthesis for the identification of anatomic structures in dogs.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluating cone-beam computed tomography vs. intraoral radiography for the detection of endodontal disease in dogs: diagnostic performance and inter-rater agreement.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of a novel imaging modality, digital tomosynthesis (DT), for identification of predefined anatomic dental and maxillomandibular structures in dogs. Methods: DT images were compared to conventional intraoral dental radiography (DR) for the diagnostic yield regarding the presence and quality of visualization of 35 structures. DT imaging and full mouth DR were obtained on 16 canine cadaver heads and a semi-quantitative scoring system was used to characterize the ability of each imaging method to identify the anatomic structures. Results: The results demonstrated that each imaging modality, and orientation, was superior for certain anatomic structures. Discussion: Overall, although one modality did not prove superior to the other, digital tomosynthesis appears to be an appropriate novel tool for identification of specific anatomic structures in the dog skull.
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.