Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Introduction: Cone beam computed tomography periapical volume index (CBCTPAVI) is a categorisation tool to assess periapical lesion size in three-dimensions and predict treatment outcomes. This index was determined using a time-consuming semi-automatic segmentation technique. This study compared artificial intelligence (AI) with semi-automated segmentation to determine AI's ability to accurately determine CBCTPAVI score.
Methods: CBCTPAVI scores for 500 tooth roots were determined using both the semi-automatic segmentation technique in three-dimensional imaging analysis software (Mimics Research™) and AI (Diagnocat™). A confusion matrix was created to compare the CBCTPAVI score by the AI with the semi-automatic segmentation technique. Evaluation metrics, precision, recall, F1-score (2×precision×recallprecision+recall), and overall accuracy were determined.
Results: In 84.4 % (n = 422) of cases the AI classified CBCTPAVI score the same as the semi-automated technique. AI was unable to classify any lesion as index 1 or 2, due to its limitation in small volume measurement. When lesions classified as index 1 and 2 by the semi-automatic segmentation technique were excluded, the AI demonstrated levels of precision, recall and F1-score, all above 0.85, for indices 0, 3-6; and accuracy over 90 %.
Conclusions: Diagnocat™ with its ability to determine CBCTPAVI score in approximately 2 min following upload of the CBCT could be an excellent and efficient tool to facilitate better monitoring and assessment of periapical lesions in everyday clinical practice and/or radiographic reporting. However, to assess three-dimensional healing of smaller lesions (with scores 1 and 2), further advancements in AI technologies are needed.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2024.108527 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!