基于web的人工智能头颅测量分析中混合牙列和恒牙列的比较验证

Sun-Hwa Shin, Donghyun Kim
{"title":"基于web的人工智能头颅测量分析中混合牙列和恒牙列的比较验证","authors":"Sun-Hwa Shin, Donghyun Kim","doi":"10.5933/jkapd.2022.49.1.85","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the difference in measurement between conventional orthodontic analysis and artificial intelligence orthodontic analysis in pediatric and adolescent patients aged 7 - 15 with the mixed and permanent dentition. A total of 60 pediatric and adolescent patients (30 mixed dentition, 30 permanent dentition) who underwent lateral cephalometric radiograph for orthodontic diagnosis were randomly selected. Seventeen cephalometric landmarks were identified, and 22 measurements were calculated by 1 examiner, using both conventional analysis method and deep learning-based analysis method. Errors due to repeated measurements were assessed by Pearson’s correlation coefficient. For the mixed dentition group and the permanent dentition group, respectively, a paired t-test was used to evaluate the difference between the 2 methods. The difference between the 2 methods for 8 measurements were statistically significant in mixed dentition group: APDI, SNA, SNB, Mandibular plane angle, LAFH (p < 0.001), Facial ratio (p = 0.001), U1 to SN (p = 0.012), and U1 to A-Pg (p = 0.021). In the permanent dentition group, 4 measurements showed a statistically significant difference between the 2 methods: ODI (p = 0.020), Wits appraisal (p = 0.025), Facial ratio (p = 0.026), and U1 to A-Pg (p = 0.001). Compared with the time-consuming conventional orthodontic analysis, the deep learning-based cephalometric system can be clinically acceptable in terms of reliability and validity. However, it is essential to understand the limitations of the deep learning-based programs for orthodontic analysis of pediatric and adolescent patients and use these programs with the proper assessment.","PeriodicalId":22818,"journal":{"name":"THE JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN ACADEMY OF PEDTATRIC DENTISTRY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Validation of the Mixed and Permanent Dentition at Web-Based Artificial Intelligence Cephalometric Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Sun-Hwa Shin, Donghyun Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.5933/jkapd.2022.49.1.85\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the difference in measurement between conventional orthodontic analysis and artificial intelligence orthodontic analysis in pediatric and adolescent patients aged 7 - 15 with the mixed and permanent dentition. A total of 60 pediatric and adolescent patients (30 mixed dentition, 30 permanent dentition) who underwent lateral cephalometric radiograph for orthodontic diagnosis were randomly selected. Seventeen cephalometric landmarks were identified, and 22 measurements were calculated by 1 examiner, using both conventional analysis method and deep learning-based analysis method. Errors due to repeated measurements were assessed by Pearson’s correlation coefficient. For the mixed dentition group and the permanent dentition group, respectively, a paired t-test was used to evaluate the difference between the 2 methods. The difference between the 2 methods for 8 measurements were statistically significant in mixed dentition group: APDI, SNA, SNB, Mandibular plane angle, LAFH (p < 0.001), Facial ratio (p = 0.001), U1 to SN (p = 0.012), and U1 to A-Pg (p = 0.021). In the permanent dentition group, 4 measurements showed a statistically significant difference between the 2 methods: ODI (p = 0.020), Wits appraisal (p = 0.025), Facial ratio (p = 0.026), and U1 to A-Pg (p = 0.001). Compared with the time-consuming conventional orthodontic analysis, the deep learning-based cephalometric system can be clinically acceptable in terms of reliability and validity. However, it is essential to understand the limitations of the deep learning-based programs for orthodontic analysis of pediatric and adolescent patients and use these programs with the proper assessment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22818,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"THE JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN ACADEMY OF PEDTATRIC DENTISTRY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"THE JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN ACADEMY OF PEDTATRIC DENTISTRY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5933/jkapd.2022.49.1.85\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"THE JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN ACADEMY OF PEDTATRIC DENTISTRY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5933/jkapd.2022.49.1.85","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本回顾性研究旨在评估传统正畸分析与人工智能正畸分析在7 - 15岁混合恒牙儿童和青少年患者中的测量差异。随机选择60例儿童和青少年患者(30例混合牙列,30例恒牙列)行侧位头颅x线片进行正畸诊断。采用常规分析方法和基于深度学习的分析方法,确定了17个头侧测量标志,并计算了22个测量值。通过Pearson相关系数评估重复测量引起的误差。对于混合牙列组和恒牙列组,分别采用配对t检验来评价两种方法的差异。混合牙列组APDI、SNA、SNB、下颌平面角、LAFH (p < 0.001)、颜面比(p = 0.001)、U1 / SN (p = 0.012)、U1 / A-Pg (p = 0.021) 8项指标2种方法比较差异均有统计学意义。恒牙列组4项指标ODI (p = 0.020)、Wits (p = 0.025)、Facial ratio (p = 0.026)、U1 / a - pg (p = 0.001)两种方法比较差异有统计学意义。与耗时的传统正畸分析相比,基于深度学习的头颅测量系统在信度和效度方面可被临床接受。然而,了解基于深度学习的程序用于儿科和青少年患者正畸分析的局限性,并将这些程序与适当的评估一起使用是至关重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Validation of the Mixed and Permanent Dentition at Web-Based Artificial Intelligence Cephalometric Analysis
This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the difference in measurement between conventional orthodontic analysis and artificial intelligence orthodontic analysis in pediatric and adolescent patients aged 7 - 15 with the mixed and permanent dentition. A total of 60 pediatric and adolescent patients (30 mixed dentition, 30 permanent dentition) who underwent lateral cephalometric radiograph for orthodontic diagnosis were randomly selected. Seventeen cephalometric landmarks were identified, and 22 measurements were calculated by 1 examiner, using both conventional analysis method and deep learning-based analysis method. Errors due to repeated measurements were assessed by Pearson’s correlation coefficient. For the mixed dentition group and the permanent dentition group, respectively, a paired t-test was used to evaluate the difference between the 2 methods. The difference between the 2 methods for 8 measurements were statistically significant in mixed dentition group: APDI, SNA, SNB, Mandibular plane angle, LAFH (p < 0.001), Facial ratio (p = 0.001), U1 to SN (p = 0.012), and U1 to A-Pg (p = 0.021). In the permanent dentition group, 4 measurements showed a statistically significant difference between the 2 methods: ODI (p = 0.020), Wits appraisal (p = 0.025), Facial ratio (p = 0.026), and U1 to A-Pg (p = 0.001). Compared with the time-consuming conventional orthodontic analysis, the deep learning-based cephalometric system can be clinically acceptable in terms of reliability and validity. However, it is essential to understand the limitations of the deep learning-based programs for orthodontic analysis of pediatric and adolescent patients and use these programs with the proper assessment.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信