骨骼面部不对称:人工和人工智能分析的可靠性。

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Natalia Kazimierczak, Wojciech Kazimierczak, Zbigniew Serafin, Paweł Nowicki, Tomasz Jankowski, Agnieszka Jankowska, Joanna Janiszewska-Olszowska
{"title":"骨骼面部不对称:人工和人工智能分析的可靠性。","authors":"Natalia Kazimierczak, Wojciech Kazimierczak, Zbigniew Serafin, Paweł Nowicki, Tomasz Jankowski, Agnieszka Jankowska, Joanna Janiszewska-Olszowska","doi":"10.1093/dmfr/twad006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare artificial intelligence (AI)-driven web-based platform and manual measurements for analysing facial asymmetry in craniofacial CT examinations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 95 craniofacial CT scans from patients aged 18-30 years. The degree of asymmetry was measured based on AI platform-predefined anatomical landmarks: sella (S), condylion (Co), anterior nasal spine (ANS), and menton (Me). The concordance between the results of automatic asymmetry reports and manual linear 3D measurements was calculated. The asymmetry rate (AR) indicator was determined for both automatic and manual measurements, and the concordance between them was calculated. The repeatability of manual measurements in 20 randomly selected subjects was assessed. The concordance of measurements of quantitative variables was assessed with interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) according to the Shrout and Fleiss classification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Erroneous AI tracings were found in 16.8% of cases, reducing the analysed cases to 79. The agreement between automatic and manual asymmetry measurements was very low (ICC < 0.3). A lack of agreement between AI and manual AR analysis (ICC type 3 = 0) was found. The repeatability of manual measurements and AR calculations showed excellent correlation (ICC type 2 > 0.947).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results indicate that the rate of tracing errors and lack of agreement with manual AR analysis make it impossible to use the tested AI platform to assess the degree of facial asymmetry.</p>","PeriodicalId":11261,"journal":{"name":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","volume":"53 1","pages":"52-59"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11003660/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Skeletal facial asymmetry: reliability of manual and artificial intelligence-driven analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Natalia Kazimierczak, Wojciech Kazimierczak, Zbigniew Serafin, Paweł Nowicki, Tomasz Jankowski, Agnieszka Jankowska, Joanna Janiszewska-Olszowska\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/dmfr/twad006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare artificial intelligence (AI)-driven web-based platform and manual measurements for analysing facial asymmetry in craniofacial CT examinations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 95 craniofacial CT scans from patients aged 18-30 years. The degree of asymmetry was measured based on AI platform-predefined anatomical landmarks: sella (S), condylion (Co), anterior nasal spine (ANS), and menton (Me). The concordance between the results of automatic asymmetry reports and manual linear 3D measurements was calculated. The asymmetry rate (AR) indicator was determined for both automatic and manual measurements, and the concordance between them was calculated. The repeatability of manual measurements in 20 randomly selected subjects was assessed. The concordance of measurements of quantitative variables was assessed with interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) according to the Shrout and Fleiss classification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Erroneous AI tracings were found in 16.8% of cases, reducing the analysed cases to 79. The agreement between automatic and manual asymmetry measurements was very low (ICC < 0.3). A lack of agreement between AI and manual AR analysis (ICC type 3 = 0) was found. The repeatability of manual measurements and AR calculations showed excellent correlation (ICC type 2 > 0.947).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results indicate that the rate of tracing errors and lack of agreement with manual AR analysis make it impossible to use the tested AI platform to assess the degree of facial asymmetry.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11261,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dento maxillo facial radiology\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"52-59\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11003660/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dento maxillo facial radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twad006\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twad006","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的比较人工智能(AI)驱动的网络平台和人工测量方法,以分析颅面部 CT 检查中的面部不对称情况:研究包括 95 例 18-30 岁患者的颅面部 CT 扫描。不对称程度根据 AI 平台预先定义的解剖地标进行测量:蝶鞍 (S)、髁突 (Co)、前鼻骨棘 (ANS) 和耳廓 (Me)。计算了自动不对称报告结果与手动线性三维测量结果之间的一致性。确定了自动和手动测量的不对称率(AR)指标,并计算了两者之间的一致性。对随机抽取的 20 名受试者的手动测量重复性进行了评估。根据 Shrout 和 Fleiss 分类法,使用类间相关系数(ICC)评估定量变量测量的一致性:自动和人工不对称测量的一致性非常低(ICC < 0.3)。人工智能和手动 AR 分析之间缺乏一致性(ICC 类型 3 = 0)。人工测量和 AR 计算的重复性显示出极好的相关性(ICC 类型 2 > 0.947):结果表明,由于追踪错误率和与人工 AR 分析缺乏一致性,因此无法使用测试的人工智能平台来评估面部不对称程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Skeletal facial asymmetry: reliability of manual and artificial intelligence-driven analysis.

Objectives: To compare artificial intelligence (AI)-driven web-based platform and manual measurements for analysing facial asymmetry in craniofacial CT examinations.

Methods: The study included 95 craniofacial CT scans from patients aged 18-30 years. The degree of asymmetry was measured based on AI platform-predefined anatomical landmarks: sella (S), condylion (Co), anterior nasal spine (ANS), and menton (Me). The concordance between the results of automatic asymmetry reports and manual linear 3D measurements was calculated. The asymmetry rate (AR) indicator was determined for both automatic and manual measurements, and the concordance between them was calculated. The repeatability of manual measurements in 20 randomly selected subjects was assessed. The concordance of measurements of quantitative variables was assessed with interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) according to the Shrout and Fleiss classification.

Results: Erroneous AI tracings were found in 16.8% of cases, reducing the analysed cases to 79. The agreement between automatic and manual asymmetry measurements was very low (ICC < 0.3). A lack of agreement between AI and manual AR analysis (ICC type 3 = 0) was found. The repeatability of manual measurements and AR calculations showed excellent correlation (ICC type 2 > 0.947).

Conclusions: The results indicate that the rate of tracing errors and lack of agreement with manual AR analysis make it impossible to use the tested AI platform to assess the degree of facial asymmetry.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
65
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (DMFR) is the journal of the International Association of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (IADMFR) and covers the closely related fields of oral radiology and head and neck imaging. Established in 1972, DMFR is a key resource keeping dentists, radiologists and clinicians and scientists with an interest in Head and Neck imaging abreast of important research and developments in oral and maxillofacial radiology. The DMFR editorial board features a panel of international experts including Editor-in-Chief Professor Ralf Schulze. Our editorial board provide their expertise and guidance in shaping the content and direction of the journal. Quick Facts: - 2015 Impact Factor - 1.919 - Receipt to first decision - average of 3 weeks - Acceptance to online publication - average of 3 weeks - Open access option - ISSN: 0250-832X - eISSN: 1476-542X
×
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