牙科中的机器学习:范围审查。

IF 7.7
PLOS digital health Pub Date : 2025-07-23 eCollection Date: 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000940
Shrey Lakhotia, Hormazd Godrej, Amandeep Kaur, Chaitanya Sai Nutakki, Michelle Mun, Pascal Eber, Leo Anthony Celi
{"title":"牙科中的机器学习:范围审查。","authors":"Shrey Lakhotia, Hormazd Godrej, Amandeep Kaur, Chaitanya Sai Nutakki, Michelle Mun, Pascal Eber, Leo Anthony Celi","doi":"10.1371/journal.pdig.0000940","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificial intelligence (AI), specifically machine learning (ML), is increasingly applied in decision-making for dental diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. However, the methodological completeness of published models has not been rigorously assessed. We performed a scoping review of PubMed-indexed articles (English, 1 January 2018â€'31 December 2023) that used ML in any dental specialty. Each study was evaluated with the TRIPOD + AI rubric for key reporting elements such as data preprocessing, model validation, and clinical performance. Out of 1,506 identified studies, 280 met the inclusion criteria. Oral and maxillofacial radiology (27.5%), oral and maxillofacial surgery (15.0%), and general dentistry (14.3%) were the most represented specialties. Sixty-four studies (22.9%) lacked comparison with a clinical reference standard or existing model performing the same task. Most models focused on classification (59.6%), whereas generative applications were relatively rare (1.4%). Key gaps included limited assessment of model bias, poor outlier reporting, scarce calibration evaluation, low reproducibility, and restricted data access. ML could transform dental care, but robust calibration assessment and equity evaluation are critical for real-world adoption. Future research should prioritize error explainability, outlier reporting, reproducibility, fairness, and prospective validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":74465,"journal":{"name":"PLOS digital health","volume":"4 7","pages":"e0000940"},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12286321/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Machine learning in dentistry: a scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Shrey Lakhotia, Hormazd Godrej, Amandeep Kaur, Chaitanya Sai Nutakki, Michelle Mun, Pascal Eber, Leo Anthony Celi\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pdig.0000940\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Artificial intelligence (AI), specifically machine learning (ML), is increasingly applied in decision-making for dental diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. However, the methodological completeness of published models has not been rigorously assessed. We performed a scoping review of PubMed-indexed articles (English, 1 January 2018â€'31 December 2023) that used ML in any dental specialty. Each study was evaluated with the TRIPOD + AI rubric for key reporting elements such as data preprocessing, model validation, and clinical performance. Out of 1,506 identified studies, 280 met the inclusion criteria. Oral and maxillofacial radiology (27.5%), oral and maxillofacial surgery (15.0%), and general dentistry (14.3%) were the most represented specialties. Sixty-four studies (22.9%) lacked comparison with a clinical reference standard or existing model performing the same task. Most models focused on classification (59.6%), whereas generative applications were relatively rare (1.4%). Key gaps included limited assessment of model bias, poor outlier reporting, scarce calibration evaluation, low reproducibility, and restricted data access. ML could transform dental care, but robust calibration assessment and equity evaluation are critical for real-world adoption. Future research should prioritize error explainability, outlier reporting, reproducibility, fairness, and prospective validation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLOS digital health\",\"volume\":\"4 7\",\"pages\":\"e0000940\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12286321/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLOS digital health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000940\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLOS digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000940","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人工智能(AI),特别是机器学习(ML),越来越多地应用于牙科诊断、预后和治疗的决策。然而,已发表模型的方法完整性尚未得到严格评估。我们对pubmed索引的文章(英文,2018年1月1日至2023年12月31日)进行了范围审查,这些文章在任何牙科专业中使用了ML。每项研究都用TRIPOD + AI标准评估关键报告要素,如数据预处理、模型验证和临床表现。在1506项确定的研究中,280项符合纳入标准。口腔颌面放射学(27.5%)、口腔颌面外科(15.0%)和普通牙科(14.3%)是最具代表性的专科。64项研究(22.9%)缺乏与临床参考标准或执行相同任务的现有模型的比较。大多数模型专注于分类(59.6%),而生成应用相对较少(1.4%)。主要差距包括模型偏差评估有限、异常值报告不佳、校准评估不足、可重复性低以及数据访问受限。机器学习可以改变牙科保健,但强大的校准评估和公平评估对于现实世界的采用至关重要。未来的研究应优先考虑错误的可解释性、异常值报告、可重复性、公平性和前瞻性验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Machine learning in dentistry: a scoping review.

Machine learning in dentistry: a scoping review.

Machine learning in dentistry: a scoping review.

Machine learning in dentistry: a scoping review.

Artificial intelligence (AI), specifically machine learning (ML), is increasingly applied in decision-making for dental diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. However, the methodological completeness of published models has not been rigorously assessed. We performed a scoping review of PubMed-indexed articles (English, 1 January 2018â€'31 December 2023) that used ML in any dental specialty. Each study was evaluated with the TRIPOD + AI rubric for key reporting elements such as data preprocessing, model validation, and clinical performance. Out of 1,506 identified studies, 280 met the inclusion criteria. Oral and maxillofacial radiology (27.5%), oral and maxillofacial surgery (15.0%), and general dentistry (14.3%) were the most represented specialties. Sixty-four studies (22.9%) lacked comparison with a clinical reference standard or existing model performing the same task. Most models focused on classification (59.6%), whereas generative applications were relatively rare (1.4%). Key gaps included limited assessment of model bias, poor outlier reporting, scarce calibration evaluation, low reproducibility, and restricted data access. ML could transform dental care, but robust calibration assessment and equity evaluation are critical for real-world adoption. Future research should prioritize error explainability, outlier reporting, reproducibility, fairness, and prospective validation.

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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信