ReviewImaging science in dentistry2026
Deep learning for automated detection and classification of temporomandibular joint disorders: A scoping review.
Review 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To map the available evidence on the application of deep learning (DL) in the imaging-based detection and classification of temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs), and to identify research trends, imaging modalities investigated, and gaps in the current literature. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Wiley Online Library, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane, covering publications between January 2015 and January 2025, without restrictions on language. Studies applying any DL algorithm to medical imaging for the detection, segmentation, or classification of TMDs were included. Results: Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 15 retrospective studies. MRI was the most frequently used imaging modality (10 studies), followed by CBCT (3 studies) and panoramic radiography (2 studies). The most commonly applied DL architectures were CNN-based classifiers (9 studies), followed by segmentation frameworks including U-Net and DeepLabV3+ (4 studies), and object-detection models such as YOLO(two studies). Conclusion: This scoping review demonstrates that the available evidence on deep learning applications in TMJ imaging is growing, with CNN-based classifiers and segmentation frameworks applied to MRI and CBCT showing early promise as adjunctive diagnostic tools. However, most studies are retrospective, single-center, and lack external validation. These findings map a rapidly evolving field and highlight the need for multicenter prospective studies, standardized imaging and reporting protocols, and greater integration of explainable AI frameworks to guide future research and support clinical translation.
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.