MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321010140 · doi:10.1155/2023/5494429

Ultrasound Imaging of the Periodontium Complex: A Reliability Study

2023· article· en· W4321010140 on OpenAlexafffund
Carlos Alberto Figueredo, Lawrence H. Le, Kim‐Cuong T. Nguyen, Thanh‐Giang La, Edmond Lou, Neelambar R. Kaipatur, Hollis Lai, Monica Gibson, Carlos Flores‐Mir, Paul W. Major, Fabiana T. Almeida

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Dentistry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMitacs
KeywordsMedicineCementoenamel junctionUltrasoundOrthodonticsPeriodontologyDentistryAlveolar crestDental alveolusMouthpieceNuclear medicineMolarRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Ultrasonography is a noninvasive, low-cost diagnostic tool widely used in medicine. Recent studies have demonstrated that ultrasound imaging might have the potential to be used intraorally to assess periodontal biomarkers. Objectives: To evaluate the reliability of interlandmark distance measurements on intraoral ultrasound images of the periodontal tissues. Materials and Methods: = 31) clinics were recruited. A 20 MHz handheld intraoral ultrasound transducer was used to scan maxillary and mandibular incisors, canines, and premolars. Distances between the alveolar bone crest and cementoenamel junction (ABC-CEJ), gingival thickness (GT), and alveolar bone thickness (ABT) were measured by 3 raters. The intercorrelation coefficient (ICC) and mean absolute deviation (MAD) were calculated among and between the raters. Raters also scored images according to quality. Results: The ICC scores for intrarater reliability were 0.940 (0.932-0.947), 0.953 (0.945-0.961), and 0.859 (0.841-0.876) for ABC-CEJ, GT, and ABT, respectively. The intrarater MAD values were 0.023 (±0.019) mm, 0.014 (±0.005) mm, and 0.005 (±0.003) mm, respectively. The ICC scores for interrater reliability were 0.872 (95% CI: 0.836-0.901), 0.958 (95% CI: 0.946-0.968), and 0.836 (95% CI: 0.789-0.873) for ABC-CEJ, GT, and ABT, respectively. The interrater MAD values were 0.063 (±0.029) mm, 0.023 (±0.018) mm, and 0.027 (±0.012) mm, respectively. Conclusions: The present study showed the high reliability of ultrasound in both intrarater and interrater assessments. Results suggest there might be a potential use of intraoral ultrasound to assess periodontium.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of DentistrySame topicDental Radiography and ImagingFrench-language works237,207