MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401483661 · doi:10.3390/tomography10080092

An Overview of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography and Dental Panoramic Radiography in Dentistry in the Community

2024· review· en· W4401483661 on OpenAlexaff
David MacDonald, Vera Telyakova

Bibliographic record

VenueTomography · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCone beam computed tomographyRadiographyCone beam ctComputed tomographyDental radiographyMedicineDentistryMedical physicsCone (formal languages)OrthodonticsRadiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study reviews the two most important and frequently used systems of tomography used in dentistry today. These are the dental panoramic radiograph (DPR) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). The importance of the DPR has been accentuated by the recent COVID-19 pandemic, as it does not produce an aerosol. Its clinical importance is derived from its panoramic display of the jaws and associated structures and should be examined for incidental findings that may portend a potentially serious outcome. An important recent spin-off of the DPR is the extra-oral bitewing, which can replace its traditional, uncomfortable and aerosol-generating intra-oral counterpart. Although much has been written about them, this paper reviews their essential attributes and limitations in clinical dentistry. Although attempts have been made to reproduce some of the attributes of CT in CBCT such as Hounsfield Units (HU) and improve the contrast resolution of the soft tissues, these remain elusive. Nevertheless, CBCT's dataset should be appropriately reconstructed to fully display the clinical feature prompting its prescription. In certain cases, more than one mode of reconstruction is required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTomographySame topicDental Radiography and ImagingFrench-language works237,207