ArticleOral radiology2026
Impact of image processing techniques on deep learning-based classification accuracy of cervical vertebral maturation.
Article in Oral radiology, 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.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of a Machine Learning Model for Cervical Vertebra-Based Skeletal Maturity Assessment in Pediatric and Adolescent Patients Using Cephalometric Radiographs.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis research aimed to investigate how different image processing techniques influence the performance of a deep learning model in classifying cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) stages.
methodsA dataset of 799 cephalometric radiographs, originally obtained for orthodontic diagnosis, was analyzed. For each image, a rectangular section including the second to fourth cervical vertebrae (C2-C4) was extracted and used as the standard image. A version with low signal intensity was created and termed the "low-density image." Additionally, images were labeled by filling the internal areas of C2, C3, and C4 with yellow, generating three labeled variants: standard labeling, low-density labeling, and dual-color labeling. All image types were classified into six CVM stages (CS1-CS6) using a convolutional neural network based on the AlexNet architecture, implemented via Neural Network Console. From the dataset, 641 images were allocated for learning and 158 for testing. Classification accuracy was evaluated across all image types.
resultsThe average classification accuracies for the standard and low-density images were 46.8% and 48.7%, respectively. In contrast, labeled images performed significantly better, with accuracies of 82.3% (standard labeling), 81.0% (low-density labeling), and 88.0% (dual-color labeling).
conclusionsAmong the image variations, the dual-color labeling dataset achieved the highest classification performance. These results suggest that enhanced labeling techniques can significantly improve the reliability of deep learning models for automated assessment of skeletal maturity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41484816What 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.