ArticleOral radiology2026
A BMC-Net model for the recognition and segmentation of mandibular canal bifurcation.
Article in Oral radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo accurately identify the anatomical structure and trajectory of the mandibular canal, helping dentists avoid surgical risks and develop effective treatment plans, this study aimed to develop a deep learning model for rapidly diagnosing and identifying mandibular canal bifurcation. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe collected a total of 160 reported case images from the PubMed and Web of Science databases. Of these, 140 images were allocated to a training set and 20 to a testing set, to develop the BMC-Net deep learning model. Performance was evaluated using the dice similarity coefficient (DSC), area under the curve (AUC), intersection over union (IoU), recall, precision, and a confusion matrix, with comparisons made against the UNet model. To determine clinical utility, a comparative analysis with clinicians was performed, focusing on AUC, sensitivity, specificity, and time efficiency.
resultsThe BMC-Net model achieved a DSC of 0.9704, AUC of 0.9458, IoU of 0.9412, recall of 0.9458, and precision of 0.9829 in the training set, with significant improvements in the testing set, where it reached a DSC of 0.9877, AUC of 0.9965, IoU of 0.9539, recall of 0.9569, and precision of 0.9976. Compared to clinicians, the BMC-Net model achieved an AUC of 0.9636, sensitivity of 0.9314, and specificity of 0.9461, and detected mandibular canal divergence in just 0.1004 s, significantly faster than the average clinician's recognition time of 95.5 to 164.75 s (P < 0.05).
conclusionsThis groundbreaking model's utility markedly improves the accuracy of clinical diagnoses on mandibular nerve canal bifurcations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41493698What 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.