ArticleEuropean oral research2026
Performance evaluation of deep learning models for overbite classification on cephalometric radiographs.
Article in European oral research, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of different deep learning algorithms in classifying overbite based on lateral cephalometric radiographic images. Materials and methods: This study was conducted using lateral cephalometric radiographs of 1062 patients. Overbite values were measured via WebCeph, and the radiographs were categorized into three groups (Overbite 1, Overbite 2, and Overbite 3) based on cephalometric measurements. Six deep learning models (ResNet101, DenseNet201, EfficientNetV2-B0, ConvNetBase, EfficientNet-B0, and a Hybrid Model) were employed to classify the radiographs. Model performance was evaluated using various metrics, including F1-score, accuracy, precision, recall, mean absolute error (MAE), Cohen's Kappa coefficient, and area under the ROC curve (AUC-ROC). Additionally, confusion matrices and Grad-CAM visualizations were generated to further interpret the models' decision-making processes. Results: All deep learning models employed in this study achieved classification accuracies exceeding 85%. Among them, the EfficientNet B0 and Hybrid models yielded the highest accuracy rates, whereas the ConvNetBase model demonstrated the lowest performance in terms of classification accuracy. Conclusion: The findings of this study highlight the potential of deep learning models to accurately and reliably classify cephalometric overbite categories without the need for conventional cephalometric analysis.
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.