Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42781703›Full record

ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2026

Comparative diagnostic accuracy of a You Only Look Once-11s deep learning model and human observers for detection of periapical lesions on intraoral periapical radiographs.

Rajinder Kumar Bansal, Ashtha Arya, Birmohan Singh, Mamta Singla, Jatinder Pal Singh, Marut Kumar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Rajinder Kumar BansalDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, SGT Dental College, Hospital and Research Institute, SGT University, Gurugram, Haryana, India.
Ashtha AryaDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, SGT Dental College, Hospital and Research Institute, SGT University, Gurugram, Haryana, India.
Birmohan SinghDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering Technology, Longowal, Punjab, India.
Mamta SinglaDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, SGT Dental College, Hospital and Research Institute, SGT University, Gurugram, Haryana, India.
Jatinder Pal SinghDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering Technology, Longowal, Punjab, India.
Marut KumarDepartment of Computer Applications and Technology, School of Computer Applications and Technology, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Context: Interpretation of intraoral periapical radiographs (IOPAs) is influenced by image quality and observer-related factors. This study evaluated a lightweight You Only Look Once (YOLO)-11s model for automated detection of periapical lesions and compared its output with that of a human observer. Aim: The study aimed to assess and compare the accuracy and diagnostic performance of YOLO-11s and human observers for detecting periapical lesions on IOPAs. Materials and Methods: Radiographic records from 500 patients were reviewed retrospectively, yielding 1330 annotated tooth-level images. The dataset was divided into training (80%), validation (10%), and test (10%) subsets. Images were normalized, contrast-enhanced, and resized to 640 × 640 pixels. YOLO-11s was trained for up to 200 epochs. Performance was assessed using precision, sensitivity (recall), F1-score, mean average precision (mAP), confusion matrix analysis, precision-recall curves, and inference time. Cohen's kappa was used to assess interobserver agreement. Results: The YOLO-11s model demonstrated high diagnostic performance for periapical lesion detection, with a sensitivity of 89.4%, precision of 88.0%, and an F1-score of 88.4%. Out of 133 true tooth-level targets, 121 were detected, and 106 were correctly predicted as the periapical lesion (PLA) or healthy (PRA), giving an overall accuracy of 79.7%. The mAP50 and mAP50-95 values were 0.85 and 0.48, respectively, indicating good detection ability but moderate localization precision. However, no background region was correctly identified. Conclusion: The YOLO-11s model demonstrated high sensitivity for automated detection of periapical lesions on IOPAs and may serve as a valuable adjunctive diagnostic tool in endodontic practice.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceconvolutional neural networkdeep learningendodonticsperiapical lesions

Identifiers

PMID42781703
PMCPMC13600713

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.