ArticleBMC oral health2026
AKUDENTAL teeth instance segmentation dataset: a cross-dataset analysis.
Article in BMC oral health, 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.
- From Algorithmic Performance to Clinical Translation: Translational Readiness of Imaging-Based Artificial Intelligence in Dentistry-A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping diagnostics and disease prevention in the dental domain. Panoramic X-ray imaging is central to this progress but demands large, high-quality annotated datasets. We therefore present AKUDENTAL, a new dataset for instance segmentation of dental radiographs, to serve as a resource for model development and to assess the challenges of generalizability.
methodsWe annotated 333 panoramic images, labeling 9,956 structures across 32 individual teeth and three restorative categories: implants, bridges, and crown–filling. We established semantic segmentation, object detection, and instance-segmentation baselines using UNet, DeepLabV3 + , YOLOv11, and Mask R-CNN models. Generalizability was assessed via 5-fold cross-validation and a cross-dataset evaluation on the Tufts, DENTEX, and Dual-labeled datasets.
resultsA cross-dataset evaluation on the Tufts, DENTEX, and Dual-labeled datasets revealed that variations in annotation protocols are a significant factor contributing to performance differences. The cross-dataset evaluation demonstrated widely varying performance, with mean Average Precision (mAP) scores for multiclass detection ranging from a low of 0.34 on the DENTEX dataset to 0.71 on the Dual-labeled dataset Our analysis illustrates how such discrepancies can impact the interpretation of model performance.
conclusionsThe AKUDENTAL dataset provides a robust new resource for the field. The performance disparities revealed in our cross-dataset analysis are not model limitations but instead strengthen the argument that annotation inconsistencies are a critical barrier to developing universally applicable AI. This highlights the imperative for broader standardization in data annotation, extending beyond tooth identification to encompass common dental procedures and restorations.
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.