Among Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning Methods, Automated Gradient-Boosting Models Accurately Score Intraoral Plaque in Non-Standardized Images.

Eric Coy, William Santo, Bonnie Jue, Helen Betts, Francisco Ramos-Gomez, Stuart A Gansky
{"title":"Among Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning Methods, Automated Gradient-Boosting Models Accurately Score Intraoral Plaque in Non-Standardized Images.","authors":"Eric Coy, William Santo, Bonnie Jue, Helen Betts, Francisco Ramos-Gomez, Stuart A Gansky","doi":"10.1080/19424396.2024.2422146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous automated models inaccurately scored non-standardized plaque images. The objectives were to develop and test automated image selection and intraoral plaque-scoring (primary outcome measure in a prevention trial for preschoolers).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Evaluating 1650 plaque-disclosed primary teeth (teeth D, E, F, G) from 435 photographs from UCSF/UCLA clinical trials, data were cleaned, transformed, and modeled with statistical and machine learning (ML) algorithms; data visualizations utilized Jupyter Notebooks, Python, OpenCV, and Sci-kit Learn libraries, with Laplacian filter preprocessing. Image selection and plaque-scoring used 8 ML classification models. Mean plaque-scoring used 8 ML regression models. Models were tuned with 80:20 train:test split, stratified 5-fold cross-validation (5-CV) (unstratified in regression models), and hyperparameter optimization. Area-under-the-curve receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve and R<sup>2</sup> determined the best classification and regression models, respectively, compared to calibrated dentist researcher ratings. Training time was a secondary metric. Manual segmentation used Photoshop's lasso tool. Average and dominant hue, saturation, and brightness values were features for training plaque-scoring algorithms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Best performing models were: Support Vector Machine-Gaussian for image selection, 5-CV AUC-ROC of 0.99 and 0.76s of training time; Gradient-Boosting classification and regression models for individual teeth (5-CV AUC-ROC of 0.99 with 105s training); and mean plaque-scoring algorithms (5-CV R<sup>2</sup> of 0.72 with 1415s training).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Accurate automated plaque-scoring is attainable without the high computational and financial costs of deep learning (DL) models. Automated plaque-scoring is attainable with little user-manipulation.</p><p><strong>Practical implications: </strong>Implementing automated tooth segmentation and synthetic sample generation with DL training may strengthen reliability, validity, and efficiency for clinical, research, and teledentistry applications by eliminating manual image preprocessing.</p>","PeriodicalId":94113,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the California Dental Association","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11845216/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the California Dental Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19424396.2024.2422146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Previous automated models inaccurately scored non-standardized plaque images. The objectives were to develop and test automated image selection and intraoral plaque-scoring (primary outcome measure in a prevention trial for preschoolers).

Methods: Evaluating 1650 plaque-disclosed primary teeth (teeth D, E, F, G) from 435 photographs from UCSF/UCLA clinical trials, data were cleaned, transformed, and modeled with statistical and machine learning (ML) algorithms; data visualizations utilized Jupyter Notebooks, Python, OpenCV, and Sci-kit Learn libraries, with Laplacian filter preprocessing. Image selection and plaque-scoring used 8 ML classification models. Mean plaque-scoring used 8 ML regression models. Models were tuned with 80:20 train:test split, stratified 5-fold cross-validation (5-CV) (unstratified in regression models), and hyperparameter optimization. Area-under-the-curve receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve and R2 determined the best classification and regression models, respectively, compared to calibrated dentist researcher ratings. Training time was a secondary metric. Manual segmentation used Photoshop's lasso tool. Average and dominant hue, saturation, and brightness values were features for training plaque-scoring algorithms.

Results: Best performing models were: Support Vector Machine-Gaussian for image selection, 5-CV AUC-ROC of 0.99 and 0.76s of training time; Gradient-Boosting classification and regression models for individual teeth (5-CV AUC-ROC of 0.99 with 105s training); and mean plaque-scoring algorithms (5-CV R2 of 0.72 with 1415s training).

Conclusions: Accurate automated plaque-scoring is attainable without the high computational and financial costs of deep learning (DL) models. Automated plaque-scoring is attainable with little user-manipulation.

Practical implications: Implementing automated tooth segmentation and synthetic sample generation with DL training may strengthen reliability, validity, and efficiency for clinical, research, and teledentistry applications by eliminating manual image preprocessing.

背景:以前的自动模型对非标准化牙菌斑图像的评分不准确。我们的目标是开发并测试自动图像选择和口内牙菌斑评分(学龄前儿童预防试验的主要结果测量):对来自加州大学旧金山分校/加州大学洛杉矶分校临床试验的 435 张照片中的 1650 颗牙菌斑暴露的基牙(牙齿 D、E、F、G)进行评估,使用统计和机器学习 (ML) 算法对数据进行清理、转换和建模;使用 Jupyter Notebooks、Python、OpenCV 和 Sci-kit Learn 库进行数据可视化,并使用拉普拉斯滤波器进行预处理。图像选择和斑块评分使用了 8 个 ML 分类模型。平均斑块评分使用 8 个 ML 回归模型。模型的调整采用 80:20 的训练与测试比例、分层 5 倍交叉验证(5-CV)(回归模型未分层)和超参数优化。与牙医研究人员的校准评分相比,曲线下面积接收器操作特征曲线(AUC-ROC)和R2分别确定了最佳分类和回归模型。训练时间是次要指标。手动分割使用 Photoshop 的套索工具。色调、饱和度和亮度的平均值和主要值是训练斑块评分算法的特征:结果:表现最好的模型是支持向量机-高斯模型用于图像选择,5-CV AUC-ROC 为 0.99,训练时间为 0.76 秒;梯度提升分类和回归模型用于单个牙齿(5-CV AUC-ROC 为 0.99,训练时间为 105 秒);平均斑块评分算法(5-CV R2 为 0.72,训练时间为 1415 秒):结论:无需深度学习(DL)模型的高昂计算和财务成本,就能实现精确的自动斑块评分。自动牙斑评分只需很少的用户操作即可实现:利用深度学习训练实现自动牙齿分割和合成样本生成,可以省去人工图像预处理,从而提高临床、研究和远程齿科应用的可靠性、有效性和效率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信