ArticleImaging science in dentistry2026
Using of artificial intelligence to evaluate image quality for interproximal bone level assessment on bitewing radiographs.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model capable of certifying whether the quality of the bitewing image is adequate or compromised, as an intermediate tool for the technical analysis prior to the final evaluation of the alveolar bone crest. Materials and Methods: A total of 372 bitewing radiographs from a radiographic database were classified by three evaluators into control 186 (standard vertical angulation) and test 186 (offset vertical angulation) groups, forming a consensus gold standard for accuracy with the algorithm classification. The region of interest was defined as the non-overlapping area between the buccal and palatal/lingual cusps for data labeling, using the YOLOv8n-Seg architecture for training, validation, and testing. The model's performance was evaluated by comparing the average areas among groups, computing the metrics of precision, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, recall and F1 score. Results: The AI model achieved a classification accuracy of 96.7%, with 100% sensitivity and 93.8% specificity (ICC = 0.95). The precision was 0.93, the recall 1.0 and the F1-score 0.96. Across both training and validation stages, significant differences were observed between the test and control groups ( Conclusion: The AI model accurately segmented and classified whether or not vertical angulation was compromising the quality of bitewing radiographs, thereby minimizing errors in the diagnostic interpretation of the alveolar bone crest.
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.