ArticleJournal of clinical periodontology2025
AI-Driven Detection and Measurement of Keratinized Gingiva in Dental Photographs: Validation Using Reference Retainers.
Article in Journal of clinical periodontology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo evaluate a deep learning (DL) model for detecting keratinized gingiva (KG) in dental photographs and validate its clinical applicability using reference retainers for calibration. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 576 sextant photographs were selected from 32 subjects, each with three sets of photographs: iodine-stained, unstained and line-marked retainers. Relative keratinized gingiva width (rKGW) was measured using visual, functional and histochemical staining methods with reference retainers. A pre-trained DeepLabv3 model with ResNet50 backbone was fine-tuned to predict KG areas, which were then applied to the photographs with line-marked retainers for subsequent rKGW measurement.
resultsThe AI model achieved a Dice coefficient of 93.30% and an accuracy of 93.32%. Using histochemical measurements as gold standards, the absolute differences in rKGW of AI measurements were statistically insignificant with visual (p = 0.935) and functional (p = 0.979) measurements. The adjusted difference between AI and histochemical measurements was 0.377 mm. AI closely matched histochemical measurements in the maxillary anterior region (0.011 mm, p = 0.903) but was significantly higher in the maxillary posterior region (0.327 mm, p < 0.05).
conclusionsThe proposed AI model is the first to reliably identify full-mouth KG, validated thoroughly using reference retainers. However, predictions for posterior teeth warrant further improvement.
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.