ArticleScientific reports2025
Diagnosis of trigeminal neuralgia based on plain skull radiography using convolutional neural network.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Orofacial Pain: Diagnostic and Predictive Performance Across Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Neurovascular Compression Syndromes of Cranial Nerves: A Multidisciplinary Guide to Management.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- Automated meningioma detection using skull X ray images with deep learning and machine learning classifiers.Scientific reports · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to determine whether trigeminal neuralgia can be diagnosed using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) based on plain X-ray skull images. A labeled dataset of 166 skull images from patients aged over 16 years with trigeminal neuralgia was compiled, alongside a control dataset of 498 images from patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms. The images were randomly partitioned into training, validation, and test datasets in a 6:2:2 ratio. Classifier performance was assessed using accuracy and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. Gradient-weighted class activation mapping was applied to identify regions of interest. External validation was conducted using a dataset obtained from another institution. The CNN achieved an overall accuracy of 87.2%, with sensitivity and specificity of 0.72 and 0.91, respectively, and an AUROC of 0.90 on the test dataset. In most cases, the sphenoid body and clivus were identified as key areas for predicting trigeminal neuralgia. Validation on the external dataset yielded an accuracy of 71.0%, highlighting the potential of deep learning-based models in distinguishing X-ray skull images of patients with trigeminal neuralgia from those of control individuals. Our preliminary results suggest that plain x-ray can be potentially used as an adjunct to conventional MRI, ideally with CISS sequences, to aid in the clinical diagnosis of TN. Further refinement could establish this approach as a valuable screening tool.
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.