ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
AI-Assisted 3D diagnosis of impacted maxillary canines: A validation study.
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 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.
- Artificial Intelligence in the Radiological Diagnosis of Impacted Maxillary Canines: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to validate an artificial intelligence (AI)-based automated image analysis for three-dimensional (3D) characterization of impacted canine position. In addition, it compared clinical treatment plans developed using conventional orthodontic records versus with the aid of the AI-generated diagnostic report.
methodsA sample of 228 cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans for patients with impacted maxillary canines was retrospectively collected. AI models were used to automatically orient scans and identify anatomical landmarks to quantify impaction severity. The accuracy of the AI approach was validated by comparing its assessments with manual measurements performed by expert clinicians. Clinical applicability was assessed by comparing diagnoses made by clinicians using conventional records to those made using AI-based diagnostic system.
resultsA total of 316 impacted canines were assessed, with 20.9% classified as buccal, 31.3% as bicortical, and 47.8% as palatal. The AI-based diagnostic system accurately identified the position of impacted canines, achieving a mean detection success rate of 96.2%. Palatally impacted canines tend to have the crown closer to the midpalatal plane, reduced vertical distance to the occlusal plane, and greater pitch and roll angles compared to bicortically and buccally impacted canines (P<0.001). Overlap with adjacent teeth was the primary contributor to the AI-generated severity index (81.11%). The AI-based diagnostic system report significantly influenced clinicians' decisions, particularly patient education (72.31%) and biomechanics (51.15%).
conclusionsThe AI-based diagnostic system accurately characterized impacted canine position and severity, demonstrating the effectiveness of AI in enhancing diagnosis for impacted canine. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The automated diagnostic report provides objective measurements that enhance clinicians' understanding of impaction complexity, improve patient communication, and support more informed biomechanical and treatment-planning decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41222734What 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.