SynthesisClinical oral implants research2026
Diagnostic Accuracy of Deep Learning Models in Detecting Peri-Implant Marginal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical oral implants research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Implant Dentistry: Clinical Validity, Diagnostic Performance, Surgical Planning, and Medico-Legal Implications-A Narrative Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Radiomics analysis of panoramic radiographs using machine learning for the detection of peri-implantitis.BMC oral health · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeri-implantitis is a common implant complication requiring early detection to prevent bone loss and implant failure. Deep learning models show promise for enhancing radiographic diagnosis.
objectivesThis review systematically evaluated the diagnostic performance of deep learning models in detecting peri-implant marginal bone loss on radiographic images. MATERIALS AND
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ProQuest identified studies published between 2010 and July 2025. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality using QUADAS-2. Diagnostic metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, area under the curve (AUC), were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity and publication bias were evaluated using I
resultsFive studies comprising 12,545 periapical and panoramic radiographs met inclusion criteria. Deep learning models achieved pooled sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 91%, and AUC of 0.95, indicating high diagnostic performance. Positive and negative likelihood ratios suggested strong clinical utility. Quality was generally good, though reporting of implant characteristics and data augmentation was inconsistent. Meta-regression revealed that dataset size and unit of analysis influenced accuracy, whereas imaging type did not. No publication bias was found.
conclusionDeep learning models demonstrate high accuracy in detecting radiographic marginal bone loss, potentially indicating peri-implantitis but cannot substitute for comprehensive clinical assessment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These models offer a promising adjunct for radiographic detection of marginal bone loss, supporting clinicians in early diagnosis and timely interventions.
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.