Artificial intelligence and radiomics in the diagnosis of intraosseous lesions of the gnathic bones: A systematic review.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this systematic review (SR) is to gather evidence on the use of machine learning (ML) models in the diagnosis of intraosseous lesions in gnathic bones and to analyze the reliability, impact, and usefulness of such models. This SR was performed in accordance with the PRISMA 2022 guidelines and was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022379298).
METHODS
The acronym PICOS was used to structure the inquiry-focused review question "Is Artificial Intelligence reliable for the diagnosis of intraosseous lesions in gnathic bones?" The literature search was conducted in various electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Lilacs, IEEE Xplore, and Gray Literature (Google Scholar and ProQuest). Risk of bias assessment was performed using PROBAST, and the results were synthesized by considering the task and sampling strategy of the dataset.
RESULTS
Twenty-six studies were included (21 146 radiographic images). Ameloblastomas, odontogenic keratocysts, dentigerous cysts, and periapical cysts were the most frequently investigated lesions. According to TRIPOD, most studies were classified as type 2 (randomly divided). The F1 score was presented in only 13 studies, which provided the metrics for 20 trials, with a mean of 0.71 (±0.25).
CONCLUSION
There is no conclusive evidence to support the usefulness of ML-based models in the detection, segmentation, and classification of intraosseous lesions in gnathic bones for routine clinical application. The lack of detail about data sampling, the lack of a comprehensive set of metrics for training and validation, and the absence of external testing limit experiments and hinder proper evaluation of model performance.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.