Accuracy of Digitally Enhanced Images Compared with Unprocessed Digital Images in The Detection of External Root Resorption

dc.contributor.authorGhoncheh, Zahra
dc.contributor.authorAfkhami, Farzaneh
dc.contributor.authorFard, Mohammad Javad Kharazi
dc.contributor.authorSorkhabi, Rasa Ebrahimi
dc.contributor.authorAydin, Ulkem
dc.contributor.orcIDhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2130-2812en_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-09T07:25:50Z
dc.date.available2023-06-09T07:25:50Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.description.abstractThis study was for comparing the accuracy of processed digital images (reverse-contrast and colorization) with that of unprocessed digital images in detection of external root resorption (ERR). Eighty single-rooted human teeth were selected for this study. Mild, moderate, and severe ERR were simulated on 20 teeth each, and 20 were left untreated. Digital images using the paralleling technique were made, and three types of images were finally produced: unprocessed, reverse-contrast, and colorized. Three experienced dentists examined the images. The Wilson confidence intervals were calculated to analyze the diagnostic data. The kappa statistic was used to determine interobserver agreement. For unprocessed images, the rate of correct classification of mild and moderate to severe ERR was 88.3 and 80.0 %, respectively. The corresponding rate for reverse-contrast images was 81.7 and 80.0 %, and that for colorized images was 93.3 and 80.0 %, respectively. The sensitivity of unprocessed images in the detection of mild and moderate to severe ERR was 0.93 and 0.84, respectively. The corresponding sensitivity for reverse-contrast images was 0.83 and 0.84, and that for colorized images was 0.93 and 0.84, respectively. The specificity of unprocessed, reverse-contrast, and colorized images was 0.90, 0.92, and 1.00, respectively. The kappa coefficient for interobserver agreement was 0.86 for unprocessed images, 0.88 for reverse-contrast images, and 0.89 for colorized images. The difference between the sensitivity and specificity of unprocessed, reverse-contrast, and colorized images was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The three techniques were of similar and desirable accuracy in detection of ERR.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage139en_US
dc.identifier.issn0911-6028en_US
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84990841052en_US
dc.identifier.startpage133en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11727/9482
dc.identifier.volume33en_US
dc.identifier.wos000400280600007en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1007/s11282-016-0258-4en_US
dc.relation.journalORAL RADIOLOGYen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergien_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectExternal root resorptionen_US
dc.subjectDigital imageen_US
dc.subjectEnhancementen_US
dc.titleAccuracy of Digitally Enhanced Images Compared with Unprocessed Digital Images in The Detection of External Root Resorptionen_US
dc.typearticleen_US

Files

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: