-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Automatic caries detection in bitewing radiographs-Part II: experimental comparison
A. Tichý, L. Kunt, V. Nagyová, J. Kybic
Jazyk angličtina Země Německo
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
Grantová podpora
GIP-21-SL-01-232
Všeobecná Fakultní Nemocnice v Pranewize
CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16 019/0000765
Ministerstvo Školství, Mládeže a Tělovýchovy
NLK
ProQuest Central
od 1997-03-01 do Před 1 rokem
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
od 1997-03-01 do Před 1 rokem
Public Health Database (ProQuest)
od 1997-03-01 do Před 1 rokem
- MeSH
- interproximální technika MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- náchylnost k zubnímu kazu * MeSH
- zubní kaz * diagnostické zobrazování MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the detection of caries in bitewing radiographs by multiple dentists with an automatic method and to evaluate the detection performance in the absence of a reliable ground truth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four experts and three novices marked caries using bounding boxes in 100 bitewing radiographs. The same dataset was processed by an automatic object detection deep learning method. All annotators were compared in terms of the number of errors and intersection over union (IoU) using pairwise comparisons, with respect to the consensus standard, and with respect to the annotator of the training dataset of the automatic method. RESULTS: The number of lesions marked by experts in 100 images varied between 241 and 425. Pairwise comparisons showed that the automatic method outperformed all dentists except the original annotator in the mean number of errors, while being among the best in terms of IoU. With respect to a consensus standard, the performance of the automatic method was best in terms of the number of errors and slightly below average in terms of IoU. Compared with the original annotator, the automatic method had the highest IoU and only one expert made fewer errors. CONCLUSIONS: The automatic method consistently outperformed novices and performed as well as highly experienced dentists. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The consensus in caries detection between experts is low. An automatic method based on deep learning can improve both the accuracy and repeatability of caries detection, providing a useful second opinion even for very experienced dentists.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc24007201
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20240423155803.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 240412s2024 gw f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1007/s00784-024-05528-2 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)38315246
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a gw
- 100 1_
- $a Tichý, Antonín $u Institute of Dental Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine of the Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
- 245 10
- $a Automatic caries detection in bitewing radiographs-Part II: experimental comparison / $c A. Tichý, L. Kunt, V. Nagyová, J. Kybic
- 520 9_
- $a OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the detection of caries in bitewing radiographs by multiple dentists with an automatic method and to evaluate the detection performance in the absence of a reliable ground truth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four experts and three novices marked caries using bounding boxes in 100 bitewing radiographs. The same dataset was processed by an automatic object detection deep learning method. All annotators were compared in terms of the number of errors and intersection over union (IoU) using pairwise comparisons, with respect to the consensus standard, and with respect to the annotator of the training dataset of the automatic method. RESULTS: The number of lesions marked by experts in 100 images varied between 241 and 425. Pairwise comparisons showed that the automatic method outperformed all dentists except the original annotator in the mean number of errors, while being among the best in terms of IoU. With respect to a consensus standard, the performance of the automatic method was best in terms of the number of errors and slightly below average in terms of IoU. Compared with the original annotator, the automatic method had the highest IoU and only one expert made fewer errors. CONCLUSIONS: The automatic method consistently outperformed novices and performed as well as highly experienced dentists. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The consensus in caries detection between experts is low. An automatic method based on deep learning can improve both the accuracy and repeatability of caries detection, providing a useful second opinion even for very experienced dentists.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a interproximální technika $7 D016300
- 650 12
- $a náchylnost k zubnímu kazu $7 D003733
- 650 12
- $a zubní kaz $x diagnostické zobrazování $7 D003731
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Kunt, Lukáš $u Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Nagyová, Valéria $u Institute of Dental Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine of the Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Kybic, Jan $u Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic. kybic@fel.cvut.cz
- 773 0_
- $w MED00005714 $t Clinical oral investigations $x 1436-3771 $g Roč. 28, č. 2 (2024), s. 133
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38315246 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20240412 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20240423155800 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2081282 $s 1216968
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2024 $b 28 $c 2 $d 133 $e 20240205 $i 1436-3771 $m Clinical oral investigations $n Clin Oral Investig $x MED00005714
- GRA __
- $a GIP-21-SL-01-232 $p Všeobecná Fakultní Nemocnice v Pranewize
- GRA __
- $a CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16 019/0000765 $p Ministerstvo Školství, Mládeže a Tělovýchovy
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20240412