The use of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of carious lesions: Systematic review and meta-analysis
Pecorari, V. G. A.; Cezario, L. R. A.; Arato, C. V. d. B.; Costa, T. d. L.; Cortellazzi, K. L.; Pecorari, R. F.; Silva, J. E.
Show abstract
BackgroundThe use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has many applications in the healthcare field. Dental caries is a disease with a prevalence rate of over 50% in Brazil. The diagnosis of caries is usually based on a clinical examination and supplementary tests such as X-rays. The accuracy of a diagnostic test is evaluated by its sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Various algorithms and neural network configurations are being used for caries diagnosis. ObjectiveThis systematic review evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of using deep machine learning through a convolutional neural network in diagnosing dental caries. MethodsThis systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines and registered with Prospero (ID CRD42024411477). We used the PubMed, MEDLINE, and LILACS databases and MeSH and DECs descriptors in the search. ResultsAfter analyzing the eligibility of the articles, we selected 33 for full-text reading and included 13 in the meta-analysis. We used the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy data, and the number of positive and negative tests to generate a 2x2 table with TP, FP, FN, TN rates, and accuracy. We evaluated the heterogeneity of the SROC curve using the Zhou & Dendurkuri I 2 approach. The results showed that the sensitivity and specificity of the machine learning for detecting dental caries were 0.79 and 0.87, respectively, and the AUC of the SROC curve was 0.885. ConclusionThe literature presented a variety of convolutional neural networks [CNN] architecture, image acquisition methods, and training volumes, which could lead to heterogeneity. However, the accuracy of using artificial intelligence for caries diagnosis was high, making it an essential tool for dentistry.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Which surface treatment improves the long-term repair bond strength of aged methacrylate-based composite resin restorations? A systematic review and network meta-analysis 95%
- Evaluation of RNA extraction free method for detection of SARS-COV-2 in salivary samples for mass screening for COVID-19 89%
- A Novel Smart City Based Framework on Perspectives for application of Machine Learning in combatting COVID-19 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Knowledge and aptitude of early childhood, primary and/or secondary education teachers referred to first aid measures in dental trauma in the province of Seville (Spain.) 95%
- Different features of cholera in malnourished and non-malnourised children: analysis of 10-year surveillance data from a large diarrheal disease hospital in urban Bangladesh 87%
- Cine phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging of calf muscle contraction in pediatric patients with cerebral palsy and healthy children: comparison of voluntary motion and electrically evoked motion 85%
Similar papers in this journal
- Quality assessment of studies included in Cochrane oral health systematic reviews 96%
- The Burden Of Poor Household Drinking-Water Quality On HIV/AIDS Infected Individuals In Rural Communities Of Ugu District Municipality, Kwazulu-Natal Province, South Africa 89%
- Social determinants of health, the family, and childrens personal hygiene: a comparative study. 88%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.