Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 384

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Deep Learning for the Radiographic Detection of Apical Lesions

Ekert, Thomas, Krois, Joachim, Meinhold, Leonie, Elhennawy, Karim, Emara, Ramy, Golla, Tatiana, Schwendicke, Falk·2019·Journal of Endodontics

Abstract

INTRODUCTION We applied deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to detect apical lesions (ALs) on panoramic dental radiographs. METHODS Based on a synthesized data set of 2001 tooth segments from panoramic radiographs, a custom-made 7-layer deep neural network, parameterized by a total number of 4,299,651 weights, was trained and validated via 10 times repeated group shuffling. Hyperparameters were tuned using a grid search. Our reference test was the majority vote of 6 independent examiners who detected ALs on an ordinal scale (0, no AL; 1, widened periodontal ligament, uncertain AL; 2, clearly detectable lesion, certain AL). Metrics were the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and positive/negative predictive values. Subgroup analysis for tooth types was performed, and different margins of agreement of the reference test were applied (base case: 2; sensitivity analysis: 6). RESULTS The mean (standard deviation) tooth level prevalence of both uncertain and certain ALs was 0.16 (0.03) in the base case. The AUC of the CNN was 0.85 (0.04). Sensitivity and specificity were 0.65 (0.12) and 0.87 (0.04,) respectively. The resulting positive predictive value was 0.49 (0.10), and the negative predictive value was 0.93 (0.03). In molars, sensitivity was significantly higher than in other tooth types, whereas specificity was lower. When only certain ALs were assessed, the AUC was 0.89 (0.04). Increasing the margin of agreement to 6 significantly increased the AUC to 0.95 (0.02), mainly because the sensitivity increased to 0.74 (0.19). CONCLUSIONS A moderately deep CNN trained on a limited amount of image data showed satisfying discriminatory ability to detect ALs on panoramic radiographs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.joen.2019.03.016

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 25 references

Cited by

See all 384

Metadata

Authors
Ekert, T., Krois, J., Meinhold, L., Elhennawy, K., Emara, R., Golla, T., & Schwendicke, F.
Venue
Journal of Endodontics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-07
Volume
45
Issue
7
Pages
917-922.e5
ISSN
0099-2399 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2947000504
Cited by
384
References
25
FWCI
35.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Deep Learning for the Radiographic Detection of Apical Lesions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.joen.2019.03.016
The paper
Ekert, T., Krois, J., Meinhold, L., Elhennawy, K., Emara, R., Golla, T., & Schwendicke, F. (2019). Deep Learning for the Radiographic Detection of Apical Lesions. Journal of Endodontics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2019.03.016

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.