journal article·2023-06-08Open access

Precision and Accuracy Assessment of Cephalometric Analyses Performed by Deep Learning Artificial Intelligence with and without Human Augmentation

Sumer Panesar, Alyssa Zhao, Eric Hollensbe, Ariel Wong, Surya Sruthi Bhamidipalli, George Eckert, Vinicius Dutra, Hakan Turkkahraman

Applied Sciences· Volume 13· Issue 12

Abstract

The aim was to assess the precision and accuracy of cephalometric analyses performed by artificial intelligence (AI) with and without human augmentation. Four dental professionals with varying experience levels identified 31 landmarks on 30 cephalometric radiographs twice. These landmarks were re-identified by all examiners with the aid of AI. Precision and accuracy were assessed by using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and mean absolute errors (MAEs). AI revealed the highest precision, with a mean ICC of 0.97, while the dental student had the lowest (mean ICC: 0.77). The AI/human augmentation method significantly improved the precision of the orthodontist, resident, dentist, and dental student by 3.26%, 2.17%, 19.75%, and 23.38%, respectively. The orthodontist demonstrated the highest accuracy with an MAE of 1.57 mm/°. The AI/human augmentation method improved the accuracy of the orthodontist, resident, dentist, and dental student by 12.74%, 19.10%, 35.69%, and 33.96%, respectively. AI demonstrated excellent precision and good accuracy in automated cephalometric analysis. The precision and accuracy of the examiners with the aid of AI improved by 10.47% and 27.27%, respectively. The AI/human augmentation method significantly improved the precision and accuracy of less experienced dental professionals to the level of an experienced orthodontist.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Dental Radiography and Imaging · Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies · Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Orthodontics and Oral Facial Genetics, Indiana University School of Dentistry, Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA

Independent Researcher, 3415 S Lafountain St #I, Kokomo, IN 46902, USA

Department of Biostatistics and Health Data Science, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA

Department of Oral Pathology, Medicine and Radiology, Indiana University School of Dentistry, Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA

References (22)

Show source-provided references
1. Automatic cephalometric analysis10.2319/120506-491.1 ↗
2. The reliability and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements: A comparison of conventional and digital methods10.1259/dmfr/37010910 ↗
3. Accuracy of computerized automatic identification of cephalometric landmarks10.1067/mod.2000.110168 ↗
4. Cephalometric landmark variability among orthodontists and dentomaxillofacial radiologists: A comparative study10.5624/isd.2015.45.4.213 ↗
5. The use and performance of artificial intelligence applications in dental and maxillofacial radiology: A systematic review10.1259/dmfr.20190107 ↗
6. A preliminary study of computer recognition and identification of skeletal landmarks as a new method of cephalometric analysis10.1179/bjo.11.3.143 ↗
7. Machine learning in dental, oral and craniofacial imaging: A review of recent progress10.7717/peerj.11451 ↗
8. Automated identification of cephalometric landmarks: Part 1-Comparisons between the latest deep-learning methods YOLOV3 and SSD10.2319/022019-127.1 ↗
9. Automated Identification of Cephalometric Landmarks: Part 2-Might It Be Better Than human?10.2319/022019-129.1 ↗
10. Automatic localization of cephalometric landmarks based on convolutional neural network10.1016/j.ajodo.2021.09.012 ↗
11. Comparison of cephalometric measurements between conventional and automatic cephalometric analysis using convolutional neural network10.1186/s40510-021-00358-4 ↗
12. Junaid, N., Khan, N., Ahmed, N., Abbasi, M.S., Das, G., Maqsood, A., Ahmed, A.R., Marya, A., Alam, M.K., and Heboyan, A. (2022). Development, Application, and Performance of Artificial Intelligence in Cephalometric Landmark Identification and Diagnosis: A Systematic Review. Healthcare, 10.10.3390/healthcare10122454 ↗
13. Bao, H., Zhang, K., Yu, C., Li, H., Cao, D., Shu, H., Liu, L., and Yan, B. (2023). Evaluating the accuracy of automated cephalometric analysis based on artificial intelligence. BMC Oral Health, 23.10.1186/s12903-023-02881-8 ↗
14. Accuracy of automated 3D cephalometric landmarks by deep learning algorithms: Systematic review and meta-analysis10.1007/s11547-023-01629-2 ↗
15. How much deep learning is enough for automatic identification to be reliable?10.2319/021920-116.1 ↗
16. Accuracy of automated identification of lateral cephalometric landmarks using cascade convolutional neural networks on lateral cephalograms from nationwide multi-centres10.1111/ocr.12493 ↗
17. Artificial intelligence-based cephalometric landmark annotation and measurements according to Arnett’s analysis: Can we trust a bot to do that?10.1259/dmfr.20200548 ↗
18. Deep learning for cephalometric landmark detection: Systematic review and meta-analysis10.1007/s00784-021-03990-w ↗
19. Error in landmark identification in lateral radiographic headplates10.1093/ejo/3.1.9 ↗
20. The reliability of head film measurements. 1. Landmark identification10.1016/0002-9416(71)90028-5 ↗
21. Cephalometric landmarks identification and reproducibility: A meta analysis10.1016/S0889-5406(97)70242-7 ↗
22. Precision in cephalometric landmark identification10.1093/ejo/4.3.185 ↗