ArticleBMC oral health2025
Impacted lower third molar classification and difficulty index assessment: comparisons among dental students, general practitioners and deep learning model assistance.
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 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Photobiomodulation Therapy in the Treatment of Postoperative Pain After Impacted Third Lower Molar Extraction: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Deep learning-assisted creation of a large-scale cone beam computed tomography dataset for the segmentation of impacted mandibular third molar.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Association of 4% Articaine with Profound Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Success in Third Molar Surgery Performed by Dental Students: A Three-Anesthetic Observational Study.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Automated assessment and detection of third molar and inferior alveolar nerve relations using UNet and transfer learning models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessment of AI software's diagnostic accuracy in identifying impacted teeth in panoramic radiographs.European journal of orthodontics · 2025Article
- Effects of Photobiomodulation Therapy (PBMT) in the Management of Postoperative Pain After Third Lower Molar Extraction: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Deep learning-based approach to third molar impaction analysis with clinical classifications.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Application of Convolutional Neural Networks in an Automatic Judgment System for Tooth Impaction Based on Dental Panoramic Radiography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Integrating design thinking into dental education.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Review
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
backgroundAssessing the difficulty of impacted lower third molar (ILTM) surgical extraction is crucial for predicting postoperative complications and estimating procedure duration. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a convolutional neural network (CNN) in determining the angulation, position, classification and difficulty index (DI) of ILTM. Additionally, we compared these parameters and the time required for interpretation among deep learning (DL) models, sixth-year dental students (DSs), and general dental practitioners (GPs) with and without CNN assistance. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe dataset included cropped panoramic radiographs of 1200 ILTMs. The parameters examined were ILTM angulation, class, and position. The radiographs were randomly split into test datasets, while the remaining images were utilized for training and validation. Data augmentation techniques were applied. Another set of radiographs was used to compare the accuracy between human experts and the top-performing CNN. This dataset was also given to DSs and GPs. The participants were instructed to classify the parameters of the ILTMs both with and without the aid of the best-performing CNN model. The results, as well as the Pederson DI and time taken for both groups with and without CNN assistance, were statistically analyzed.
resultsAll the selected CNN models successfully classified ILTM angulation, class, and position. Within the DS and GP groups, the accuracy and kappa scores were significantly greater when CNN assistance was used. Among the groups, performance tests without CNN assistance revealed no significant differences in any category. However, compared with DSs, GPs took significantly less time for the class and total time, a trend that persisted when CNN assistance was used. With the CNN, the GPs achieved significantly higher accuracy and kappa scores for class classification than the DSs did (p = 0.035 and 0.010). Conversely, the DS group, with the CNN, exhibited higher accuracy and kappa scores for position classification than did the GP group (p < 0.001).
conclusionThe CNN can achieve accuracies ranging from 87 to 96% for ILTM classification. With the assistance of the CNN, both DSs and GPs exhibited significantly higher accuracy in ILTM classification. Additionally, compared with DSs with and without CNN assistance, GPs took significantly less time to inspect the class and overall.
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.