Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36661538›Full record

ArticleDentistry journal2022

Machine Learning Predictive Model as Clinical Decision Support System in Orthodontic Treatment Planning.

Jahnavi Prasad, Dharma R Mallikarjunaiah, Akshai Shetty, Narayan Gandedkar, Amarnath B Chikkamuniswamy, Prashanth C Shivashankar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dentistry journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jahnavi PrasadDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, DAPM R V Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru 560078, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0003-4775-665X
Dharma R MallikarjunaiahDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, DAPM R V Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru 560078, Karnataka, India.
Akshai ShettyDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, DAPM R V Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru 560078, Karnataka, India.
Narayan GandedkarSenior Lecturer-Orthodontics, Discipline of Orthodontics & Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8429-7758
Amarnath B ChikkamuniswamyDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, DAPM R V Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru 560078, Karnataka, India.
Prashanth C ShivashankarDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, DAPM R V Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru 560078, Karnataka, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diagnosis and treatment planning forms the crux of orthodontics, which orthodontists gain with years of expertise. Machine Learning (ML), having the ability to learn by pattern recognition, can gain this expertise in a very short duration, ensuring reduced error, inter-intra clinician variability and good accuracy. Thus, the aim of this study was to construct an ML predictive model to predict a broader outline of the orthodontic diagnosis and treatment plan. The sample consisted of 700 case records of orthodontically treated patients in the past ten years. The data were split into a training and a test set. There were 33 input variables and 11 output variables. Four ML predictive model layers with seven algorithms were created. The test set was used to check the efficacy of the ML-predicted treatment plan and compared with that of the decision made by the expert orthodontists. The model showed an overall average accuracy of 84%, with the Decision Tree, Random Forest and XGB classifier algorithms showing the highest accuracy ranging from 87-93%. Yet in their infancy stages, Machine Learning models could become a valuable Clinical Decision Support System in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning in the future.

Indexed as

clinical decision support systemmachine learningorthodontic treatment planning

Identifiers

PMID36661538
PMCPMC9858447

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.