ArticleBiosensors2026
Intelligent Distributed Optical Fiber Pressure Sensing for Dental Bite-Force Analysis.
Article in Biosensors, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Measuring bite force is essential for assessing the masticatory system and diagnosing oral disease. Existing measurement devices have low spatial resolution and susceptibility to electromagnetic interference. This paper presents a machine learning (ML)-assisted distributed fiber optic sensing system based on Scattering Level Multiplexing (SLMux) for high-resolution bite force analysis. Enhanced backscattered data were acquired through optical backscattered reflectometry from 88 sensing points along the dental arch. Measured data were reconstructed into a two-dimensional map of bite force and analyzed through an ML pipeline. Sector classification across 4 regions and weight prediction were processed by an end-to-end fine-tuned ResNet-18 Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) and classical ML approaches. ResNet-18 is compared with Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest, XGBoost (Extreme Gradient Boosting), Extra Trees, and k-Nearest Neighbors (kNN) trained on handcrafted features. On sector classification, Logistic Regression achieved the best performance (98.71% accuracy). On the weight prediction task, formulated as a 12-class problem, the end-to-end ResNet-18 CNN substantially outperformed all classical models, reaching 51.28% accuracy and a mean absolute error of 78 g, versus 124 g for the best classical model. A regression-based ResNet-18 variant was also trained on the wavelength-shift and weight data, resulting in a mean absolute error of 62.6 g. The results indicate that integrating ML with distributed fiber-optic sensing has the potential to enhance dental diagnostics and treatment planning.
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.