ArticleJournal of dental sciences2026
A visualized AI-assisted framework for pre-surgical evaluation of implant pathways on periapical radiographs.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/purpose: Implant pathway assessment is a crucial part of pre-operative planning before performing implant surgery at the site of a missing tooth. Dentists frequently use the periapical radiograph (PA) as a tool for preliminary evaluation of the implant pathway. However, the manual interpretation process is time-consuming and inherently subjective, making it susceptible to variations in PA-based implant pathway judgment due to the operator's experience. This study aims to establish an automated and objective framework that integrates an algorithm and deep learning to analyze the implant pathway preliminarily. Materials and methods: We analyzed 1,200 PAs containing missing teeth and reserved 120 PAs for testing. We first used segmentation model to identify the teeth adjacent to the missing tooth site. This segmentation served as the foundation for the GeoPath algorithm for visualized implant pathway. The results were compared with actual preliminary clinical assessment outcomes to evaluate feasibility. Results: The segmentation model achieved a precision of 96.73 %, a sensitivity of 97.12 %, and a specificity of 99.27 %, and obtained a Cohen's κ score of 0.93, which confirmed an agreement between the automated auxiliary detection results and the dentist's ground truth annotations. Furthermore, the angular error was only 2.79°, which confirmed a lower average root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.10433. This effectively reduced the time required for dentists' clinical PA assessment by 87.19 %. Conclusion: The automated implant pathway assessment framework for PAs can serve as an auxiliary tool for senior dentists during initial clinical diagnosis and as a method for training new dentists.
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.