ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
DeepLabv3 + method for detecting and segmenting apical lesions on panoramic radiography.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- DentSeg3: A Three-Branch Specialized Fusion Network for Dental Lesion Segmentation in Color Images.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Automated periapical lesion segmentation and area-based PAI indexing: a comparative deep learning study on periapical radiographs.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Apical Closure in Panoramic Radiographs Using Vision Transformer Architectures ViT-Based Apical Closure Classification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Role of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics: A Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence (AI) in restorative dentistry: current trends and future prospects.BMC oral health · 2025Review
- CervSpineNet: a hybrid deep learning-based approach for the segmentation of cervical spinous processes.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
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
objectiveThis study aimed to apply the DeepLabv3 + model and compare it with the U-Net model in terms of detecting and segmenting apical lesions on panoramic radiography.
methods260 panoramic images that contain apical lesions in different regions were collected and randomly divided into training and test datasets. All images were manually annotated for apical lesions using Computer Vision Annotation Tool software by two independent dental radiologists and a master reviewer. The DeepLabv3 + model, one of the state-of-the-art deep semantic segmentation models, was utilized using Python programming language and the TensorFlow library and applied to the prepared datasets. The model was compared with the U-Net model applied to apical lesions and other medical image segmentation problems in the literature.
resultsThe DeepLabv3 + and U-Net models were applied to the same datasets with the same hyper-parameters. The AUC and recall results of the DeepLabv3 + were 29.96% and 61.06% better than the U-Net model. However, the U-Net model gets 69.17% and 25.55% better precision and F1-score results than the DeepLabv3 + model. The difference in the IoU results of the models was not statistically significant.
conclusionsThis paper comprehensively evaluated the DeepLabv3 + model and compared it with the U-Net model. Our experimental findings indicated that DeepLabv3 + outperforms the U-Net model by a substantial margin for both AUC and recall metrics. According to those results, for detecting apical lesions, we encourage researchers to use and improve the DeepLabv3 + model. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The DeepLabv3 + model has the poten tial to improve clinical diagnosis and treatment planning and save time in the clinic.
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.