ArticleBioinformation2026
Article in Bioinformation, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metal artifacts from temporomandibular joint prosthetic components significantly compromise cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image quality and limit postoperative assessment. Therefore, it is of interest to evaluate the effectiveness of metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithms in improving CBCT image quality using standardized anthropomorphic skull phantoms with five commercially available TMJ prosthetic systems. CBCT scans were acquired with three imaging systems with and without MAR activation, followed by quantitative analysis of artifact index, signal-to-noise ratio and contrast-to-noise ratio, along with qualitative assessment by four calibrated oral radiologists. MAR algorithms significantly reduced artifact indices by 34.7-58.2% and improved diagnostic acceptability scores (3.6 ± 0.8 vs 2.1 ± 0.7; p < 0.001), with titanium components generating fewer artifacts than cobalt-chromium-molybdenum alloys. Despite substantial improvement, residual artifacts persisted near cobalt-chromium-molybdenum components, indicating the need for further optimization of MAR algorithms and CBCT acquisition protocols.
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.