有监督机器学习模型与使用牙齿相关因素预测牙周非手术治疗结果的逻辑回归模型的比较。

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ali J B Al-Sharqi, Mohammed Taha Ahmed Baban, Nada K Imran, Sarhang S Gul, Ali A Abdulkareem
{"title":"有监督机器学习模型与使用牙齿相关因素预测牙周非手术治疗结果的逻辑回归模型的比较。","authors":"Ali J B Al-Sharqi, Mohammed Taha Ahmed Baban, Nada K Imran, Sarhang S Gul, Ali A Abdulkareem","doi":"10.3390/diagnostics15182333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Conventional logistic regression is widely used in the field of dentistry, specifically for prediction purposes in longitudinal studies. This study aimed to compare the validity of different supervised machine learning (ML) models to the conventional logistic regression (LR) model to predict the outcomes of nonsurgical periodontal treatment (NSPT). <b>Methods:</b> Patients diagnosed with periodontitis received full periodontal charting, including bleeding on probing (BoP), probing pocket depth (PPD), and clinical attachment loss (CAL). Furthermore, the tooth type, tooth location, tooth surface, arch type, and gingival phenotype were also collected as site-specific predictors. Later, root surface debridement was provided and treatment outcomes were evaluated after 3 months. Site-specific predictors were used to train five ML models, including random forest (RF), decision tree (DT), support vector classifier (SVC), K-nearest neighbors (KNN), and Gaussian naïve Bayes (GNB), to develop predictive models. <b>Results:</b> Site-specific predictors of 1108 examined sites were used, and the overall accuracy prediction of the conventional LR model was 70.4%, with PPD statistically significantly associated with the outcome of NSPT (odds ratio = 0.577, <i>p</i> = 0.001). Among the ML models examined, only GNB and SVC showed comparable prediction accuracy (71.0% and 70.4%, respectively) to the LR model, whereas the prediction accuracies of KNN, RF, and DT were 65.0%, 62.0%, and 61.0%, respectively. Similarly, baseline PPD was shown to be the most important featured predictor by both the RF and DT models. <b>Conclusions</b>: The evidence suggests that supervised ML models do not outperform the LR model in predicting the outcomes of NSPT. A larger sample size and more predictors of periodontitis are necessary to enhance the accuracy of ML models over the LR model in predicting the outcomes of NSPT.</p>","PeriodicalId":11225,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostics","volume":"15 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12468186/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Supervised Machine Learning Models to Logistic Regression Model Using Tooth-Related Factors to Predict the Outcome of Nonsurgical Periodontal Treatment.\",\"authors\":\"Ali J B Al-Sharqi, Mohammed Taha Ahmed Baban, Nada K Imran, Sarhang S Gul, Ali A Abdulkareem\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/diagnostics15182333\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Conventional logistic regression is widely used in the field of dentistry, specifically for prediction purposes in longitudinal studies. This study aimed to compare the validity of different supervised machine learning (ML) models to the conventional logistic regression (LR) model to predict the outcomes of nonsurgical periodontal treatment (NSPT). <b>Methods:</b> Patients diagnosed with periodontitis received full periodontal charting, including bleeding on probing (BoP), probing pocket depth (PPD), and clinical attachment loss (CAL). Furthermore, the tooth type, tooth location, tooth surface, arch type, and gingival phenotype were also collected as site-specific predictors. Later, root surface debridement was provided and treatment outcomes were evaluated after 3 months. Site-specific predictors were used to train five ML models, including random forest (RF), decision tree (DT), support vector classifier (SVC), K-nearest neighbors (KNN), and Gaussian naïve Bayes (GNB), to develop predictive models. <b>Results:</b> Site-specific predictors of 1108 examined sites were used, and the overall accuracy prediction of the conventional LR model was 70.4%, with PPD statistically significantly associated with the outcome of NSPT (odds ratio = 0.577, <i>p</i> = 0.001). Among the ML models examined, only GNB and SVC showed comparable prediction accuracy (71.0% and 70.4%, respectively) to the LR model, whereas the prediction accuracies of KNN, RF, and DT were 65.0%, 62.0%, and 61.0%, respectively. Similarly, baseline PPD was shown to be the most important featured predictor by both the RF and DT models. <b>Conclusions</b>: The evidence suggests that supervised ML models do not outperform the LR model in predicting the outcomes of NSPT. A larger sample size and more predictors of periodontitis are necessary to enhance the accuracy of ML models over the LR model in predicting the outcomes of NSPT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11225,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diagnostics\",\"volume\":\"15 18\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12468186/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diagnostics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15182333\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15182333","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景/目的:传统的逻辑回归在牙科领域被广泛应用,特别是在纵向研究中用于预测目的。本研究旨在比较不同监督机器学习(ML)模型与传统逻辑回归(LR)模型在预测非手术牙周治疗(NSPT)结果方面的有效性。方法:对诊断为牙周炎的患者进行全面牙周检查,包括探诊出血(BoP)、探诊袋深度(PPD)和临床附着丧失(CAL)。此外,还收集了牙齿类型、牙齿位置、牙齿表面、牙弓类型和牙龈表型作为特定部位的预测因子。术后进行根面清创,3个月后评估治疗效果。使用特定地点的预测器训练随机森林(RF)、决策树(DT)、支持向量分类器(SVC)、k近邻(KNN)和高斯naïve贝叶斯(GNB)等5种机器学习模型,以建立预测模型。结果:使用了1108个检查部位的特异位点预测因子,常规LR模型的总体预测准确率为70.4%,PPD与NSPT的预后有统计学意义(优势比= 0.577,p = 0.001)。在研究的ML模型中,只有GNB和SVC具有与LR模型相当的预测精度(分别为71.0%和70.4%),而KNN、RF和DT的预测精度分别为65.0%、62.0%和61.0%。同样,基线PPD被RF和DT模型证明是最重要的特征预测因子。结论:有证据表明,有监督的ML模型在预测NSPT结果方面并不优于LR模型。为了提高ML模型在预测NSPT结果方面的准确性,需要更大的样本量和更多的牙周炎预测因子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Supervised Machine Learning Models to Logistic Regression Model Using Tooth-Related Factors to Predict the Outcome of Nonsurgical Periodontal Treatment.

Background/Objectives: Conventional logistic regression is widely used in the field of dentistry, specifically for prediction purposes in longitudinal studies. This study aimed to compare the validity of different supervised machine learning (ML) models to the conventional logistic regression (LR) model to predict the outcomes of nonsurgical periodontal treatment (NSPT). Methods: Patients diagnosed with periodontitis received full periodontal charting, including bleeding on probing (BoP), probing pocket depth (PPD), and clinical attachment loss (CAL). Furthermore, the tooth type, tooth location, tooth surface, arch type, and gingival phenotype were also collected as site-specific predictors. Later, root surface debridement was provided and treatment outcomes were evaluated after 3 months. Site-specific predictors were used to train five ML models, including random forest (RF), decision tree (DT), support vector classifier (SVC), K-nearest neighbors (KNN), and Gaussian naïve Bayes (GNB), to develop predictive models. Results: Site-specific predictors of 1108 examined sites were used, and the overall accuracy prediction of the conventional LR model was 70.4%, with PPD statistically significantly associated with the outcome of NSPT (odds ratio = 0.577, p = 0.001). Among the ML models examined, only GNB and SVC showed comparable prediction accuracy (71.0% and 70.4%, respectively) to the LR model, whereas the prediction accuracies of KNN, RF, and DT were 65.0%, 62.0%, and 61.0%, respectively. Similarly, baseline PPD was shown to be the most important featured predictor by both the RF and DT models. Conclusions: The evidence suggests that supervised ML models do not outperform the LR model in predicting the outcomes of NSPT. A larger sample size and more predictors of periodontitis are necessary to enhance the accuracy of ML models over the LR model in predicting the outcomes of NSPT.

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
Diagnostics
Diagnostics Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Clinical Biochemistry
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
2699
审稿时长
19.64 days
期刊介绍: Diagnostics (ISSN 2075-4418) is an international scholarly open access journal on medical diagnostics. It publishes original research articles, reviews, communications and short notes on the research and development of medical diagnostics. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental and/or methodological details must be provided for research articles.
×
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