Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2024
Predicting the Risk of Maxillary Canine Impaction Based on Maxillary Measurements Using Supervised Machine Learning.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
de Araujo Cristiano Miranda, Freitas Pedro Felipe de Jesus, Ferraz Aline Xavier, Andreis Patricia Kern Di Scala, Meger Michelle Nascimento, Baratto-Filho Flares, Augusto Rodenbusch Poletto Cesar, Küchler Erika Calvano, Camargo Elisa Souza, Schroder Angela Graciela Deliga
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To predict palatally impacted maxillary canines based on maxilla measurements through supervised machine learning techniques.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The maxilla images from 138 patients were analysed to investigate intermolar width, interpremolar width, interpterygoid width, maxillary length, maxillary width, nasal cavity width and nostril width, obtained through cone beam computed tomography scans. The predictive models were built using the following machine learning algorithms: Adaboost Classifier, Decision Tree, Gradient Boosting Classifier, K-Nearest Neighbours (KNN), Logistic Regression, Multilayer Perceptron Classifier (MLP), Random Forest Classifier and Support Vector Machine (SVM). A 5-fold cross-validation approach was employed to validate each model. Metrics such as area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, recall, precision and F1 Score were calculated for each model, and ROC curves were constructed.
RESULTS: The predictive model included four variables (two dental and two skeletal measurements). The interpterygoid width and nostril width showed the largest effect sizes. The Gradient Boosting Classifier algorithm exhibited the best metrics, with AUC values ranging from 0.91 [CI95% = 0.74-0.98] for test data to 0.89 [CI95% = 0.86-0.94] for crossvalidation. The nostril width variable demonstrated the highest importance across all tested algorithms.
CONCLUSION: The use of maxillary measurements, through supervised machine learning techniques, is a promising method for predicting palatally impacted maxillary canines. Among the models evaluated, both the Gradient Boosting Classifier and the Random Forest Classifier demonstrated the best performance metrics, with accuracy and AUC values exceeding 0.8, indicating strong predictive capability.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The maxilla images from 138 patients were analysed to investigate intermolar width, interpremolar width, interpterygoid width, maxillary length, maxillary width, nasal cavity width and nostril width, obtained through cone beam computed tomography scans. The predictive models were built using the following machine learning algorithms: Adaboost Classifier, Decision Tree, Gradient Boosting Classifier, K-Nearest Neighbours (KNN), Logistic Regression, Multilayer Perceptron Classifier (MLP), Random Forest Classifier and Support Vector Machine (SVM). A 5-fold cross-validation approach was employed to validate each model. Metrics such as area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, recall, precision and F1 Score were calculated for each model, and ROC curves were constructed.
RESULTS: The predictive model included four variables (two dental and two skeletal measurements). The interpterygoid width and nostril width showed the largest effect sizes. The Gradient Boosting Classifier algorithm exhibited the best metrics, with AUC values ranging from 0.91 [CI95% = 0.74-0.98] for test data to 0.89 [CI95% = 0.86-0.94] for crossvalidation. The nostril width variable demonstrated the highest importance across all tested algorithms.
CONCLUSION: The use of maxillary measurements, through supervised machine learning techniques, is a promising method for predicting palatally impacted maxillary canines. Among the models evaluated, both the Gradient Boosting Classifier and the Random Forest Classifier demonstrated the best performance metrics, with accuracy and AUC values exceeding 0.8, indicating strong predictive capability.