ArticleImaging science in dentistry2026
Enhanced dental caries detection using ConvNeXt-FPN with Faster R-CNN framework on panoramic and intraoral images.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to develop a deep learning framework for automated dental caries detection by integrating ConvNeXt with a Feature Pyramid Network (FPN) and Faster Region-based Convolutional Neural Network (Faster R-CNN). Materials and Methods: Two heterogeneous datasets were used: the CariesXrays dataset, containing 6,000 panoramic radiographs, which was divided into training (3,840), validation (960), and test (1,200) sets, and an annotated intraoral image dataset with 6,313 images, divided into training (4,040), validation (1,010), and test (1,263) sets. Grad-CAM-based explainable AI techniques were employed to enhance interpretability. Model performance was evaluated using AP, AP50, AP75, mAP@0.5, precision, and recall. Results: On the CariesXrays dataset, the model achieved an AP of 72.14%, with AP50 and AP75 values of 97.78% and 86.07%, respectively. On the intraoral dataset, the model achieved an mAP@0.5 of 97.40%, a precision of 97.35%, and a recall of 98.06%. Conclusion: The proposed framework showed robust performance in dental caries detection across different imaging modalities. Nevertheless, the absence of clinical validation and direct comparison with clinicians highlights the need for multicentric studies and real-world deployment to establish clinical reliability.
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.