Correlation with Caries Lesion Depth of The Canary System, DIAGNOdent and ICDAS II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to correlate lesion depth of natural caries, measured with Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM), to Canary Numbers (CN) derived from The Canary System™ (CS), numerical readings from DIAGNOdent (DD), and lesion scores from ICDAS II. METHODS: A total of 20 examination sites on extracted human molars and premolars were selected. The selected examination sites consisted of healthy and enamel caries on smooth and occlusal surfaces of each tooth. Two blinded dentists ranked each examination site using ICDAS II and the consensus score for each examined site was recorded. The same examination sites were scanned with CS and DD, and the CN and DD readings were recorded. After all the measurements were completed, the readings of the three caries detection methods were validated with a histological method, Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM). PLM performed by blinded examiners was used as the 'gold standard' to confirm the presence or absence of a caries lesion within each examined site and to determine caries lesion depth. RESULTS: Pearson's coefficients of correlation with caries lesion depth of CNs, DD readings and ICDAS scores were 0.84, 0.21 and 0.77, respectively. Mean ± SD CN for sound sites (n=3), caries lesion depths <800 µm (n=11), and caries lesion depths >800 µm (n=6) were 11±1, 55±15, and 75±22, respectively. Mean ± SD DD readings for sound sites, caries lesion depths <800 µm, and caries lesion depths >800 µm were 1±1, 7±11, and 8±9, respectively. Mean ± SD ICDAS II scores for sound sites, caries lesion depths <800 µm, and caries lesion depths >800 µm were 0±0, 2±1, and 2±1, respectively. The intra-operator repeatability for the Canary System was .953 (0.913, 0.978). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the CS exhibits much higher correlation with caries lesion depth compared to ICDAS II and DD. CS may provide the clinician with more information about the size and position of the lesion which might help in monitoring or treating the lesion.The present extracted tooth study found that The Canary System correlates with caries lesion depth more accurately that ICDAS II and DIAGNOdent.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".