Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T13:06:05.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Dental Radiology: Present Limitations and Future Prospects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Richard L. Webber
Affiliation:
The Bowman Gray School of Medicine, North Carolina

Abstract

Abstract The diagnostic process is likely to be limited by one or more of the following factors: (a) ambiguous signal definition, (b) inappropriate data sampling strategy, (c) inadequate signal strength, and (d) misinterpretation of data. Controlled tests suggest that the first two factors largely control performances of common dental diagnostic tasks.

Type
Special Section: Assessing the Technology of Dentistry, Part II
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alattar, M. M., Baughman, R. A. & Collett, W. K.A survey of panoramic radiographs for evaluation of normal and pathologic findings. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, 1980, 50, 472–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burgess, J. O.A panoramic radiographic analysis of Air Force basic trainees. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, 1985, 60, 113–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, E. E., Meister, F. & Lommel, T. J.Panoramic versus periapical surveys–A comparison of findings on freshmen dental students. Dental Radiology and Photography, 1977, 50, 4147.Google Scholar
Douglass, C. W., Valachovic, R. W., Wijesinah, A. et al. The clinical efficacy of dental radiography in the detection of dental caries and periodontal disease. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, 1986, 62, 330–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galen, R. S. & Gambino, R. S.Beyond normality: The predictive value and efficiency of medical diagnoses. New York: Wiley, 1975.Google Scholar
Goodson, J. M., Tanner, A. C. R., Haffaje, A. D. et al. Patterns of progression and regression of advanced destructive periodontal disease. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 1982, 9, 472–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, D. M. & Swets, J. A.Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley, 1966.Google Scholar
Grondahl, H. G. & Grondahl, K.Subtraction radiography for the diagnoses of periodontal bone lesions. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, 1983, 55, 208–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grondahl, K., Grondahl, H. G. & Webber, R. L.Digital subtraction radiography for diagnosis of periodontal bone lesions with simulated high-speed systems. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, 1983, 55, 313–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grondahl, K., Grondahl, H.-G. & Webber, R. L.Influence of variations in projection geometry on the detectability of periodontal bone lesions. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 1984, 11, 411–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurlburt, C. E. & Wuehrmann, A. H.Comparison of interproximal carious lesion detection in panoramic and standard intraoral radiography. Journal of the American Dental Association, 1976, 93, 1154–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, C. R., Marano, P. D., Swimley, D. C. & Runco, J. G.Abnormalities noted in panoramic radiographs. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, 1969, 28, 772–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Motz, J. W. & Danos, M.Image information content and patient exposure. Medical Physics, 1978, 5, 822.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muhammed, A. H. & Manson-Hing, L. R.A comparison of panoramic and intraoral radiographic surveys in evaluating a dental clinic population. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, 1982, 54, 108–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Okano, T., Wiebe, J. D., Webber, R. L. & Wagner, R. F.Effective exposure level and diagnostic performance in endodontic radiography. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, 1983, 55, 527–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payot, P., Bickel, M. & Cimasoni, G.Longitudinal quantitative radiodensitometric study of treated and untreated lower molar furcation involvements. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 1987, 14, 818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payot, P., Haroutunian, B., Pochon, Y. et al. Densitometric analysis of lower molar interradicular areas in superposible radiographs. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 1987, 14, 17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruttimann, U. E. & Webber, R. L.A simple model combining quantum noise and anatomical variation in radiographs. Medical Physics, 1984, 11, 5060.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, R. G., Kogon, S. L., Reid, J.A. & Ruprecht, A.A comparison of panorex and intraoral surveys for routine dental radiography. Journal of the Canadian Dental Association, 1977, 43, 281–86.Google Scholar
Valachovic, R. W., Douglass, C. W., Reiskin, A. B. et al. Use of panoramic radiography in the evaluation of asymptomatic adult dental patients. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, 1986, 61, 289–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webber, R. L. & Folio, J.Radiographic detectability of occipital and temporal-parietal fractures induced in cadaver heads. Journal of Trauma, 1976, 16, 115–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webber, R. L. & Stark, L.Influence of fogging radiation and mode of display on the interpretation of dental caries from conventional radiographs. Investigative Radiology, 1972, 7, 506–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webber, R. L., Ruttimann, U. E. & Groenhuis, R. A. J.Computer correction of projective distortions in dental radiographs. Journal of Dental Research, 1984, 63, 1032–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webber, R. L.Computers in dental radiography: A scenario for the future. Journal of the American Dental Association, 1985, 111, 419–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webber, R. L.Toward a better understanding of radiographic contrast. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, 1982, 54, 466–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar