ArticleBMC oral health2025
Single-click automated fractal analysis for dental radiographs: a comparative evaluation with classic ImageJ method.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anatomical Evaluation of Localized Mandibular Trabecular Texture Differences in Children with Hypodontia Using Radiographic Fractal Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Effects of Diabetes Mellitus and Periodontitis on Alveolar Bone Radiodensity Using Hounsfield Unit Measurement and Fractal Analysis.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of TMJ bone microarchitecture in malocclusion and tooth loss using fractal dimension analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to develop a single-click automated fractal analysis module for dental radiographs and compare its efficiency and accuracy with the classic ImageJ method. The study hypothesized that the new module would reduce analysis time and minimize errors. MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective study was conducted using 10 orthopantomographic images from an open-access dataset on Kaggle. Fractal analysis was performed on 100 regions using both the classic ImageJ method and the newly developed automated module. The results were analyzed for accuracy, time efficiency, and error rate.
resultsThe average difference in fractal dimension values between the two methods was minimal (0.057106 ± 0.0764495; p < 0.001). However, the new method significantly reduced the time required for analysis, averaging 31.3 s per radiograph compared to 717.6 s with the classic method. The automated method also minimized errors, with only one error recorded compared to 29 errors with the classic method.
conclusionsThe single-click automated fractal analysis module significantly improves the efficiency and accuracy of fractal analysis in dental radiographs, reducing both time and error rates. This new module has the potential to become a standard tool in dental research, facilitating large-scale studies and enhancing the reliability of fractal analysis in dentistry. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.