ArticleBMC oral health2025
Assessment of using transfer learning with different classifiers in hypodontia diagnosis.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Tooth agenesis as a potential clinical indicator of colorectal cancer susceptibility: a systematic review.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Pooled it
- LADAS: A Localization-Adaptive Dual-Branch Framework for Accurate Delineation of Teeth and Jaw Bone in Axial CBCT Slices.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHypodontia is the absence of one or more teeth in the primary or permanent dentition during development, and radiographic imaging is the most common method of diagnosis. However, in recent years, artificial intelligence-based decision support systems have been employed to make highly accurate diagnoses. The aim of this study was to classify single premolar agenesis, multiple premolar agenesis, and without tooth agenesis using various artificial intelligence approaches.
methodsOne thousand sixty-eight panoramic radiographs from pediatric patients aged between 6 and 12 years without systemic disease were sorted into three separate classes: single premolar agenesis (n = 336), multiple premolar agenesis (n = 324), and without tooth agenesis (n = 408). Pretrained convolutional neural network models (AlexNet, DarkNet-19, DarkNet-53, DenseNet-201, EfficientNet, GoogLeNet, InceptionV3, IncResV2, MobileNetV2, NasNet-Mobile, Places365, ResNet-18, ResNet-50, ResNet-101, ShuffleNet, SqueezeNet, VGG-16, VGG-19, and Xception) were used for training with the fine-tuning method and different machine learning classifiers (decision trees, discriminant analysis, logistic regression, naive Bayes, support vector machines, nearest neighbor, ensemble method, and artificial neural network). The dataset was divided into 80% for training and 20% for testing. Performance was evaluated via accuracy, recall, precision, F1-score, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) parameters.
resultsAll of the data were classified via a VGG-19 model with a bilayered neural network classifier, which achieved 95.63% accuracy, 93.26% precision, 93.34% recall, 96.73% specificity, 93.25% F1-score and 95.03% AUC and was identified as the most successful model. The accuracy values for this model were distributed as follows: 96.72% for without tooth agenesis, 95.79% for multiple premolar agenesis, and 94.39% for single premolar agenesis.
conclusionsSuccessful results of pretrained models have been demonstrated for the radiographic diagnosis of hypodontia in pediatric patients. It is expected that artificial intelligence approaches will facilitate the diagnosis of hypodontia.
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.