ArticleFrontiers in dental medicine2026
Denoising autoencoder framework for reconstructing missing periodontal clinical records.
Article in Frontiers in dental medicine, 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
Introduction: Missing clinical data pose a significant challenge for retrospective analyses and predictive modelling in periodontal research. Traditional imputation methods often overlook the complex correlations among variables and produce implausible values. This study examines the application of generative models to reconstruct missing periodontal clinical records and outlines a comprehensive workflow that spans from data generation to evaluation. Methods: A synthetic periodontal dataset of 200 virtual patients was constructed, capturing realistic distributions of demographic factors (age, gender, smoking, and diabetes) and tooth-level measurements (probing depth, attachment loss, furcation involvement, and bleeding on probing) across eight sites. Missingness was introduced at random to 15% of the clinical variables. A denoising autoencoder with a single hidden layer of 18 neurons was trained to reconstruct the original data from corrupted inputs over 100 epochs. The model learned latent representations of the data and was then used to impute missing entries. Results: Performance was assessed by comparing reconstructed values to the original data using mean absolute error (MAE) and root mean squared error (RMSE) across individual variables and categories. Overall, MAE and RMSE were 0.61 and 0.74, respectively, with attachment loss and bleeding on probing exhibiting lower errors than probing depth and furcation involvement. Conclusion: Distribution comparisons showed that imputed values closely matched original distributions. The approach offers a practical framework for handling missing periodontal data and highlights the potential of generative models to improve data completeness without introducing unrealistic values. Limitations include the simplicity of the network architecture. Future work should explore advanced models, integrate multimodal data, and evaluate on real datasets. The workflow-from synthetic data creation and masking to training, imputation, and evaluation-serves as a template for researchers tackling missing clinical data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.