Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37753028›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

Machine Learning in the Detection of Oral Lesions With Clinical Intraoral Images.

Dinesh Y, Karthikeyan Ramalingam, Pratibha Ramani, Ramya Mohan Deepak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Role of artificial intelligence in diagnosing pericoronal radiolucency.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research
    Article
  17. 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

4 authors.

Dinesh YOral Pathology and Microbiology, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, IND.
Karthikeyan RamalingamOral Pathology and Microbiology, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, IND.
Pratibha RamaniOral Pathology and Microbiology, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, IND.
Ramya Mohan DeepakEngineering, Saveetha School of Engineering, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

ai and robotics in healthcareai & robotics in healthcareartificial intelligenceclinical imagesmachine learningoral canceroral potentially malignant disorders

Identifiers

PMID37753028
PMCPMC10519616

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.