Trial reportBMC oral health2026
Effect of segmentation techniques (manual versus semiautomatic) on the accuracy of the linear measurements driven from the reconstructed mandibular condyle using CBCT.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05435417 (Effect of Segmentation Techniques), which is not on this 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.
Effect of Segmentation Techniques (Manual Versus Semiautomatic) on the Accuracy of the Reconstructed Mandibular Condyle Using CBCT(A Diagnostic Accuracy Study)
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
backgroundAssessment of the effect of segmentation technique (manual Vs semiautomatic) on the accuracy of linear measurements of the CBCT reconstructed 3D mandibular condyle compared to the real measurements of the actual condyle. MATERIALS AND
methodsfifteen dry mandibular with 30 condyles were included in this study, where condylar real linear measurements (L1, L2& L3) were assessed using a digital caliper. Then each mandible was assembled to a skull in a normally closed TMJ position, this assembly was scanned using Planmeca Promax 3D Mid CBCT machine with a standard imaging protocol. Later, 3D Slicer open-source segmentation software was used for manual and semiautomatic segmentation of mandibular condyles from the CBCT images. Afterward, the same linear measurements were assessed again on the CBCT reconstructed 3D condyles. Statistical analysis showed a normal distribution of the numerical data of all linear measurements, so repeated measures ANOVA followed by Bonferroni post hoc test were used to compare the measurements on the 3D segmented CBCT condyles to their corresponding real measurements. Reliability analysis using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) test was also adopted.
resultsThere was no statistically significant difference in linear measurement errors between manually and semiautomatically segmented condyles. The manual and semiautomatic segmented condylar width(L1) measurements showed excellent agreement with real measurements, while length (L2) measurements showed good agreement, and height (L3) measurements had poor agreement.
conclusionWe're using the Semiautomatic segmentation technique provides a reliable and time-saving segmentation approach that can yield accurate results compared to manual segmentation.
trial registrationThe study protocol was registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT05435417).
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.