Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36269467›Full record

SynthesisClinical oral investigations2022

Accuracy of artificial intelligence for tooth extraction decision-making in orthodontics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Karine Evangelista, Brunno Santos de Freitas Silva, Fernanda Paula Yamamoto-Silva, José Valladares-Neto, Maria Alves Garcia Silva, Lucia Helena Soares Cevidanes, Graziela de Luca Canto, Carla Massignan

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Karine EvangelistaSchool of Dentistry, Federal University of Goiás, Avenida Universitária esquina com 1a Avenida, Goiânia, S/N. Zip Code: 74605-220, Brazil. kemar_7@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0258-9739
Brunno Santos de Freitas SilvaDepartment of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Goiás, Avenida Universitária esquina com 1a Avenida, Goiânia, S/N. Zip Code: 74605-220, Brazil.
Fernanda Paula Yamamoto-SilvaDepartment of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Goiás, Avenida Universitária esquina com 1a Avenida, Goiânia, S/N. Zip Code: 74605-220, Brazil.
José Valladares-NetoDivision of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Goiás, Avenida Universitária esquina com 1a Avenida, Goiânia, S/N. Zip Code: 74605-220, Brazil.
Maria Alves Garcia SilvaDepartment of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Goiás, Avenida Universitária esquina com 1a Avenida, Goiânia, S/N. Zip Code: 74605-220, Brazil.
Lucia Helena Soares CevidanesDepartment of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, 1011 N University Ave, Ann Arbor, MI, Zip Code: 48109, USA.
Graziela de Luca CantoDepartment of Dentistry, Brazilian Centre for Evidence-Based Research, Health Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Rua Delfino Conti, 1240-Trindade, Florianópolis, Zip Code: 88040-535, Brazil.
Carla MassignanDepartment of Dentistry, University of Brasilia, UnB Estac. Medicina UnB-Asa Norte, Brasilia, Zip Code: 70297-400, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Goiás · BRUniversidade de Brasília · BRUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina · BRUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to analyze the accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI) for orthodontic tooth extraction decision-making. MATERIALS AND

methodsPubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Web of Science, Scopus, LIVIVO, Computers & Applied Science, ACM Digital Library, Compendex, and gray literature (OpenGrey, ProQuest, and Google Scholar) were electronically searched. Three independent reviewers selected the studies and extracted and analyzed the data. Risk of bias, methodological quality, and certainty of evidence were assessed by QUADAS-2, checklist for AI research, and GRADE, respectively.

resultsThe search identified 1810 studies. After 2 phases of selection, six studies were included, showing an unclear risk of bias of patient selection. Two studies showed a high risk of bias in the index test, while two others presented an unclear risk of bias in the diagnostic test. Data were pooled in a random model and yielded an accuracy value of 0.87 (95% CI = 0.75-0.96) for all studies, 0.89 (95% CI = 0.70-1.00) for multilayer perceptron, and 0.88 (95% CI = 0.73-0.98) for back propagation models. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the multilayer perceptron model yielded 0.84 (95% CI = 0.58-1.00), 0.89 (95% CI = 0.74-0.98), and 0.92 (95% CI = 0.72-1.00) scores, respectively. Sagittal discrepancy, upper crowding, and protrusion showed the highest ranks weighted in the models.

conclusionsOrthodontic tooth extraction decision-making using AI presented promising accuracy but should be considered with caution due to the very low certainty of evidence. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: AI models for tooth extraction decision in orthodontics cannot yet be considered a substitute for a final human decision.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceTooth ExtractionHumansSensitivity and SpecificityArtificial intelligenceDiagnosticOrthodonticsTooth extraction

Identifiers

PMID36269467
OpenAlexW4307033307

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.