MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952119492 · doi:10.1259/dmfr.20180396

A systematic review on incidental findings in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans

2019· review· en· W2952119492 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDentomaxillofacial Radiology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsCone beam computed tomographyMedicineRadiologyHead and neckRadiographyCone beam ctDentistryComputed tomographySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Cone beam CT's use (CBCT) in dentistry is increasing. Incidental findings (IFs: discoveries unrelated to the original purpose of the scan), are frequently found as a result of a large field of view. The aim of the systematic review is to analyze present literature on IFs using CBCT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The authors searched online databases of studies and assessed the prevalence of IFs among patients undergoing head and neck CBCT scans. STROBE criteria was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. RESULTS: The original search retrieved 509 abstracts of which only 10 articles met the inclusion criteria. The sample size varied between 90 and 1000 participants. The frequency of IFs of the selected articles were 24.6-94.3%. The most common non-threatening IFs were found in the airway, such as mucous retention cyst (55.1%) and sinusitis (41.7%). Other non-threatening IFs were soft tissue calcifications such as calcified stylohyloid ligament (26.7%), calcified pineal gland (19.2%), and tonsillolith (14.3%). Threatening IFs were rare findings (1.4%). Three articles reported incidental carotid artery calcifications with a prevalence of 5.7-11.6%. Pathological findings were not common between the articles, but still relevant (2.6%). The studies had a risk of bias varying from moderate to low. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high frequency of IFs, yet not all of them require immediate medical attention. The low prevalence of threatening IFs emphasizes that CBCT should not be considered a substitution for conventional radiographs, but when used, the scans should be evaluated by a maxillofacial radiologist.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it