ArticleBMC oral health2026
Evaluation of panoramic radiography for artificial intelligence-based assessment of impacted maxillary canines using cone-beam computed tomography as reference.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop and evaluate a deep learning (DL)-based artificial intelligence (AI) framework for the comprehensive assessment of impacted maxillary canines, including positional classification, buccal-palatal localization, and detection of adjacent tooth root resorption, using panoramic radiographs (PRs) validated against cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) reference standards. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included PRs and CBCT scans of 458 patients (581 impacted maxillary canines) acquired between 2020 and 2024. CBCT images served as the reference standard for buccal-palatal localization and root resorption, while canine position was determined based on beta angle measurements on PRs. Regions of interest (ROIs) were manually annotated on PRs, and cropped PR images were used as model inputs. CBCT images were used exclusively as the reference standard for labeling. A total of twelve pretrained convolutional neural network (CNN) architectures were evaluated across three diagnostic tasks. For each specific task, the top six performing architectures were selected to form a majority voting-based fusion model to enhance diagnostic accuracy. Model performance was assessed using accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score derived from confusion matrix analyses.
resultsFor three-class positional classification (horizontal, mesioangular, vertical), the best individual CNN achieved an accuracy of 88.61%, while the fusion model improved accuracy to 90.90%. In buccal-palatal localization, individual model accuracy reached 74.85%, increasing to 80.40% with fusion. For detection of adjacent tooth root resorption, the highest individual accuracy was 83.02%, and the fusion model achieved an accuracy of 88.59%.
conclusionsDL models can accurately evaluate the position, buccal-palatal localization, and root resorption associated with impacted maxillary canines when trained on ROIs extracted from PRs using CBCT-based annotations. The use of multiple CNN architectures combined with a fusion strategy significantly enhances diagnostic performance. These findings suggest that AI-based automated analysis may serve as a reliable complementary tool for improving diagnostic consistency and treatment planning in patients with impacted maxillary canines.
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.