Human examination and artificial intelligence in cephalometric landmark detection—is AI ready to take over?

Author:

Indermun Suvarna1ORCID,Shaik Shoayeb2,Nyirenda Clement3,Johannes Keith4,Mulder Riaan5

Affiliation:

1. Department of Craniofacial Biology, Pathology and Radiology, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa

2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, Oral Biology and Diagnostic Imaging, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

3. Department of Computer Science, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa

4. Department of Orthodontics, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa

5. Department of Prosthodontics, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the precision of two cephalometric landmark identification methods, namely a computer-assisted human examination software and an artificial intelligence program, based on South African data. Methods: This retrospective quantitative cross-sectional analytical study utilized a data set consisting of 409 cephalograms obtained from a South African population. 19 landmarks were identified in each of the 409 cephalograms by the primary researcher using the two programs [(409 cephalograms x 19 landmarks) x 2 methods = 15,542 landmarks)]. Each landmark generated two coordinate values (x, y), making a total of 31,084 landmarks. Euclidean distances between corresponding pairs of observations was calculated. Precision was determined by using the standard deviation and standard error of the mean. Results: The primary researcher acted as the gold-standard and was calibrated prior to data collection. The inter- and intrareliability tests yielded acceptable results. Variations were present in several landmarks between the two approaches; however, they were statistically insignificant. The computer-assisted examination software was very sensitive to several variables. Several incidental findings were also discovered. Attempts were made to draw valid comparisons and conclusions. Conclusions: There was no significant difference between the two programs regarding the precision of landmark detection. The present study provides a basis to: (1) support the use of automatic landmark detection to be within the range of computer-assisted examination software and (2) determine the learning data required to develop AI systems within an African context.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

General Dentistry,Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging,General Medicine,Otorhinolaryngology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3