ArticleCureus2023
Machine Learning in the Detection of Oral Lesions With Clinical Intraoral Images.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence Innovations in Understanding Oral Submucous Fibrosis: A Nouvelle Modernistic Approach: A Systematic Review.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnosis of Oral Cancer With Deep Learning. A Comparative Test Accuracy Systematic Review.Oral diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Toward Precision Oral Medicine in Pemphigus Vulgaris: A Conceptual AI Framework for Rituximab Response Prediction.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Advancements in Image-Based Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Narrative Review.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in the study of oral lichen planus characteristics: a review.BDJ open · 2025Review
- Differentiation of benign and malignant oral lesions through surface texture analysis and SVM modeling.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Application of machine learning in dentistry: insights, prospects and challenges.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Oral Cancer: A Comprehensive Scoping Review of Diagnostic and Prognostic Applications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence and the diagnosis of oral cavity cancer and oral potentially malignant disorders from clinical photographs: a narrative review.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Review
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Longitudinal Assessment of the Quality of Life in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients.Cureus · 2024Article
- Automated Analysis of Nuclear Parameters in Oral Exfoliative Cytology Using Machine Learning.Cureus · 2024Article
- Development and validation of an AI-based application for early detection and risk stratification of oral potentially malignant disorders.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
- Role of artificial intelligence in diagnosing pericoronal radiolucency.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionArtificial intelligence in oncology has gained a lot of interest in recent years. Early detection of Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is crucial for early management to attain a better prognosis and overall survival. Machine learning (ML) has also been used in oral cancer studies to explore the discrimination between clinically normal and oral cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsA dataset comprising 360 clinical intra-oral images of OSCC, Oral Potentially Malignant Disorders (OPMDs) and clinically healthy oral mucosa were used. Clinicians trained the machine learning model with the clinical images (n=300). Roboflow software (Roboflow Inc, USA) was used to classify and annotate images along with Multi-class annotation and object detection models trained by two expert oral pathologists. The test dataset (n=60) of new clinical images was again evaluated by two clinicians and Roboflow. The results were tabulated and Kappa statistics was performed using SPSS v23.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results: Training dataset clinical images (n=300) were used to train the clinicians and Roboflow algorithm. The test dataset (n=60) of new clinical images was again evaluated by the clinicians and Roboflow. The observed outcomes revealed that the Mean Average Precision (mAP) was 25.4%, precision 29.8% and Recall 32.9%. Based on the kappa statistical analysis the 0.7 value shows a moderate agreement between the clinicians and the machine learning model. The test dataset showed the specificity and sensitivity of the Roboflow machine learning model to be 75% and 88.9% respectively. Conclusion: In conclusion, machine learning showed promising results in the early detection of suspected lesions using clinical intraoral images and aids general dentists and patients in the detection of suspected lesions such as OPMDs and OSCC that require biopsy and immediate treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.