ArticleBMC oral health2026
Automated classification of maxillary and mandibular dental views on intraoral photographs: a comparative benchmark study and mobile proof-of-concept.
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
Abstract
Artificial intelligence is increasingly explored in dentistry to improve workflow efficiency and support image-based analysis. This study benchmarks deep learning (DL) and machine learning (ML) approaches for classifying pediatric dental views using a publicly available dataset of 9,562 intraoral images from children aged 1-14 years, covering eight maxillary and mandibular view classes. Under 10-fold cross-validation, MobileNetV2 achieved the highest performance among DL models (accuracy 95.18%, F1-score 0.95, AUC 0.997), followed by InceptionV3 (93.76%) and Xception (93.07%). Among ML methods, Logistic Regression achieved 93.33% accuracy with an AUC of 0.996. A symmetry-aware architecture, DentSym, was further proposed, achieving an average accuracy of 98.92% with balanced precision, recall, and F1-score. Model interpretability was examined using Grad-CAM, indicating that predictions were based on relevant dental regions. The highest-performing model was integrated into a prototype iOS application for real-time classification as a proof of concept. However, as cross-validation was performed at the image level due to the absence of patient identifiers, the reported performance should be interpreted as an upper-bound estimate under the current experimental setting. The study provides baseline reference results for this dataset and highlights the potential of explainable, mobile-based AI systems for future dental applications.
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.