Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37979653›Full record

ArticleJournal of endodontics2024

Uncertainty-based Active Learning by Bayesian U-Net for Multi-label Cone-beam CT Segmentation.

Jiayu Huang, Nazbanoo Farpour, Bingjian J Yang, Muralidhar Mupparapu, Fleming Lure, Jing Li, Hao Yan, Frank C Setzer

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of endodontics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Endodontics.Journal of dental research · 2024
    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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jiayu HuangSchool of Computing and Augmented Intelligence Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.
Nazbanoo FarpourDepartment of Endodontics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Bingjian J YangDepartment of Endodontics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Muralidhar MupparapuDepartment of Oral Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Fleming LureMS Technologies Corporation, Rockville, Maryland.
Jing LiSchool of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia.
Hao YanSchool of Computing and Augmented Intelligence Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.
Frank C SetzerDepartment of Endodontics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: fsetzer@upenn.edu.
University of Pennsylvania · USArizona State University · USGeorgia Institute of Technology · USSA Technologies (United States) · US

Funding

AIDen: An AI-empowered detection and diagnosis system for jaw lesions using CBCTR41DE031485 · NIDCR · MS TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION · PI LI, JING, LURE, FLEMING Y. M. · 2022 to 2022
$300k
NIDCR NIH HHS R41 DE031485
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTraining of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for biomedical image analysis depends on large annotated datasets. This study assessed the efficacy of Active Learning (AL) strategies training AI models for accurate multilabel segmentation and detection of periapical lesions in cone-beam CTs (CBCTs) using a limited dataset.

methodsLimited field-of-view CBCT volumes (n = 20) were segmented by clinicians (clinician segmentation [CS]) and Bayesian U-Net-based AL strategies. Two AL functions, Bayesian Active Learning by Disagreement [BALD] and Max_Entropy [ME], were used for multilabel segmentation ("Lesion"-"Tooth Structure"-"Bone"-"Restorative Materials"-"Background"), and compared to a non-AL benchmark Bayesian U-Net function. The training-to-testing set ratio was 4:1. Comparisons between the AL and Bayesian U-Net functions versus CS were made by evaluating the segmentation accuracy with the Dice indices and lesion detection accuracy. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to assess statistically significant differences.

resultsThe final training set contained 26 images. After 8 AL iterations, lesion detection sensitivity was 84.0% for BALD, 76.0% for ME, and 32.0% for Bayesian U-Net, which was significantly different (P < .0001; H = 16.989). The mean Dice index for all labels was 0.680 ± 0.155 for Bayesian U-Net and 0.703 ± 0.166 for ME after eight AL iterations, compared to 0.601 ± 0.267 for Bayesian U-Net over the mean of all iterations. The Dice index for "Lesion" was 0.504 for BALD and 0.501 for ME after 8 AL iterations, and at a maximum 0.288 for Bayesian U-Net.

conclusionsBoth AL strategies based on uncertainty quantification from Bayesian U-Net BALD, and ME, provided improved segmentation and lesion detection accuracy for CBCTs. AL may contribute to reducing extensive labeling needs for training AI algorithms for biomedical image analysis in dentistry.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceBayes TheoremCone-Beam Computed TomographyDental MaterialsImage Processing, Computer-AssistedUncertaintyDental Materialsactive learningArtificial IntelligenceBayesian U-NetCBCTdeep learningmultilabel segmentationperiapical lesion

Identifiers

PMID37979653
PMCPMC10842728
OpenAlexW4388752875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.