ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026
Evaluation of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Images with Artificial Intelligence.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence in the Automatic Diagnosis of Lesions Detected in Panoramic Radiographs.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
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
This study aims to evaluate the success of artificial intelligence models developed using convolutional neural network-based algorithms on CBCT images. Labeling was done by segmentation method for 15 different conditions including caries, restorative filling material, root-canal filling material, dental implant, implant supported crown, crown, pontic, impacted tooth, supernumerary tooth, residual root, osteosclerotic area, periapical lesion, radiolucent jaw lesion, radiopaque jaw lesion, and mixed appearing jaw lesion on the data set consisting of 300 CBCT images. In model development, the Mask R-CNN architecture and ResNet 101 model were used as a transfer learning method. The success metrics of the model were calculated with the confusion matrix method. When the F1 scores of the developed models were evaluated, the most successful dental implant was found to be 1, and the lowest F1 score was found to be a mixed appearing jaw lesion. F1 scores were respectively dental implant, root canal filling material, implant supported crown, restorative filling material, radiopaque jaw lesion, crown, pontic, impacted tooth, caries, residual tooth root, radiolucent jaw lesion, osteosclerotic area, periapical lesion, supernumerary tooth, for mixed appearing jaw lesion; 1 is 0.99, 0.98, 0.98, 0.97, 0.96, 0.96, 0.95, 0.94, 0.94, 0.94, 0.90, 0.90, 0.87, and 0.8. Interpreting CBCT images is a time-consuming process and requires expertise. In the era of digital transformation, artificial intelligence-based systems that can automatically evaluate images and convert them into report format as a decision support mechanism will contribute to reducing the workload of physicians, thus increasing the time allocated to the interpretation of pathologies.
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.