Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39875882›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2025

Impacted lower third molar classification and difficulty index assessment: comparisons among dental students, general practitioners and deep learning model assistance.

Paniti Achararit, Chawan Manaspon, Chavin Jongwannasiri, Promphakkon Kulthanaamondhita, Chumpot Itthichaisri, Soranun Chantarangsu, Thanaphum Osathanon, Ekarat Phattarataratip, Kraisorn Sappayatosok

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

9 authors.

Paniti AchararitPrincess Srisavangavadhana Faculty of Medicine, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, 10210, Thailand.
Chawan ManasponBiomedical Engineering Institute, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Chavin JongwannasiriPrincess Srisavangavadhana Faculty of Medicine, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, 10210, Thailand.
Promphakkon KulthanaamondhitaBangkok Hospital Dental Center Holistic Care and Dental Implant, Bangkok Hospital, Bangkok, 10310, Thailand.
Chumpot ItthichaisriBangkok Hospital Dental Center Holistic Care and Dental Implant, Bangkok Hospital, Bangkok, 10310, Thailand.
Soranun ChantarangsuDepartment of Oral Pathology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand.
Thanaphum OsathanonCenter of Excellence for Dental Stem Cell Biology, Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand.
Ekarat PhattarataratipDepartment of Oral Pathology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand. ekarat.p@chula.ac.th.
Kraisorn SappayatosokBangkok Hospital Dental Center Holistic Care and Dental Implant, Bangkok Hospital, Bangkok, 10310, Thailand. kraisorn.s@rsu.ac.th.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Deep LearningGeneral PractitionersMolar, ThirdStudents, DentalTooth, ImpactedClinical CompetenceFemaleHumansMaleNeural Networks, ComputerRadiography, PanoramicTooth ExtractionArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkDeep learningImpacted toothPederson difficulty index

Identifiers

PMID39875882
PMCPMC11776253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.