ArticleImaging science in dentistry2026
Assessment of artificial intelligence in detecting errors on panoramic 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the ability of artificial intelligence (AI) to detect common errors in panoramic radiographs. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study utilized a dataset of 2,888 anonymized panoramic radiographs obtained from multiple dental imaging units. Three annotators classified the images into 3 categories: "uneven magnification," "tongue space," and "normal." Three deep learning architectures-Attention Dental X-ray, ResNet50, and MobileNet-were developed and evaluated. Model performance was assessed using accuracy, precision, sensitivity, area under the curve, and F1 score with 5-fold cross-validation. Statistical analysis was performed using Python version 3.9 (Python Software Foundation, Beaverton, USA) with the Scikit-learn, Matplotlib, Seaborn, and PyTorch libraries for model development and evaluation. McNemar's test was used for pairwise model comparisons, and Cohen's kappa was used to assess intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Results: The Attention Dental X-ray model demonstrated superior performance among all evaluated models. It achieved the highest performance in classifying tongue space errors, with an average accuracy of 82.7%, whereas the ResNet50 and MobileNet models achieved accuracies of 56.9% and 64.1%, respectively. Conclusion: Artificial intelligence models, particularly those incorporating attention mechanisms, show strong potential as supplementary tools for detecting errors on panoramic radiographs, improving image quality, and reducing radiation exposure. This study extends the application of AI beyond disease detection to quality assurance in dental radiography. Future research should focus on real-time integration for immediate operator feedback and on the development of automated error correction methods.
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.