Cargando…

Machine Learning in Dentistry: A Scoping Review

Machine learning (ML) is being increasingly employed in dental research and application. We aimed to systematically compile studies using ML in dentistry and assess their methodological quality, including the risk of bias and reporting standards. We evaluated studies employing ML in dentistry publis...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Arsiwala-Scheppach, Lubaina T., Chaurasia, Akhilanand, Müller, Anne, Krois, Joachim, Schwendicke, Falk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9918184/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36769585
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12030937
_version_ 1784886551424008192
author Arsiwala-Scheppach, Lubaina T.
Chaurasia, Akhilanand
Müller, Anne
Krois, Joachim
Schwendicke, Falk
author_facet Arsiwala-Scheppach, Lubaina T.
Chaurasia, Akhilanand
Müller, Anne
Krois, Joachim
Schwendicke, Falk
author_sort Arsiwala-Scheppach, Lubaina T.
collection PubMed
description Machine learning (ML) is being increasingly employed in dental research and application. We aimed to systematically compile studies using ML in dentistry and assess their methodological quality, including the risk of bias and reporting standards. We evaluated studies employing ML in dentistry published from 1 January 2015 to 31 May 2021 on MEDLINE, IEEE Xplore, and arXiv. We assessed publication trends and the distribution of ML tasks (classification, object detection, semantic segmentation, instance segmentation, and generation) in different clinical fields. We appraised the risk of bias and adherence to reporting standards, using the QUADAS-2 and TRIPOD checklists, respectively. Out of 183 identified studies, 168 were included, focusing on various ML tasks and employing a broad range of ML models, input data, data sources, strategies to generate reference tests, and performance metrics. Classification tasks were most common. Forty-two different metrics were used to evaluate model performances, with accuracy, sensitivity, precision, and intersection-over-union being the most common. We observed considerable risk of bias and moderate adherence to reporting standards which hampers replication of results. A minimum (core) set of outcome and outcome metrics is necessary to facilitate comparisons across studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9918184
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99181842023-02-11 Machine Learning in Dentistry: A Scoping Review Arsiwala-Scheppach, Lubaina T. Chaurasia, Akhilanand Müller, Anne Krois, Joachim Schwendicke, Falk J Clin Med Review Machine learning (ML) is being increasingly employed in dental research and application. We aimed to systematically compile studies using ML in dentistry and assess their methodological quality, including the risk of bias and reporting standards. We evaluated studies employing ML in dentistry published from 1 January 2015 to 31 May 2021 on MEDLINE, IEEE Xplore, and arXiv. We assessed publication trends and the distribution of ML tasks (classification, object detection, semantic segmentation, instance segmentation, and generation) in different clinical fields. We appraised the risk of bias and adherence to reporting standards, using the QUADAS-2 and TRIPOD checklists, respectively. Out of 183 identified studies, 168 were included, focusing on various ML tasks and employing a broad range of ML models, input data, data sources, strategies to generate reference tests, and performance metrics. Classification tasks were most common. Forty-two different metrics were used to evaluate model performances, with accuracy, sensitivity, precision, and intersection-over-union being the most common. We observed considerable risk of bias and moderate adherence to reporting standards which hampers replication of results. A minimum (core) set of outcome and outcome metrics is necessary to facilitate comparisons across studies. MDPI 2023-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9918184/ /pubmed/36769585 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12030937 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Arsiwala-Scheppach, Lubaina T.
Chaurasia, Akhilanand
Müller, Anne
Krois, Joachim
Schwendicke, Falk
Machine Learning in Dentistry: A Scoping Review
title Machine Learning in Dentistry: A Scoping Review
title_full Machine Learning in Dentistry: A Scoping Review
title_fullStr Machine Learning in Dentistry: A Scoping Review
title_full_unstemmed Machine Learning in Dentistry: A Scoping Review
title_short Machine Learning in Dentistry: A Scoping Review
title_sort machine learning in dentistry: a scoping review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9918184/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36769585
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12030937
work_keys_str_mv AT arsiwalascheppachlubainat machinelearningindentistryascopingreview
AT chaurasiaakhilanand machinelearningindentistryascopingreview
AT mulleranne machinelearningindentistryascopingreview
AT kroisjoachim machinelearningindentistryascopingreview
AT schwendickefalk machinelearningindentistryascopingreview