ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024
Assessment of AI Models in Predicting Treatment Outcomes in Orthodontics.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the Reliability of Artificial Intelligence-Based Automatic Digital Model Analysis Compared with Manual Approaches.Turkish journal of orthodontics · 2026Article
- Applications of artificial intelligence in diagnosis and treatment planning of orthodontics: a narrative review.The Saudi dental journal · 2025Review
- AI-Driven Advancements in Orthodontics for Precision and Patient Outcomes.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Dentistry: A Narrative Review of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Applications.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Review
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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In the realm of orthodontics, the evaluation of treatment outcomes is a pivotal aspect. In recent times, artificial intelligence (AI) models have garnered attention as potential tools for predicting these outcomes. These AI models have the potential to enhance treatment planning and decision-making processes. However, a comprehensive assessment of their effectiveness and accuracy is essential before their widespread integration. Materials and Methods: In this study, we assessed the capability of AI models to predict treatment outcomes in orthodontics. A sample of 30 patients undergoing orthodontic treatment was selected. Various patient-specific parameters, including age, initial malocclusion severity, and treatment approach, were collected. The AI model was trained using a dataset comprising historical treatment cases and their respective outcomes. Subsequently, the trained AI model was applied to predict the treatment outcomes for the selected patients. Results: The results of this study indicated a moderate level of accuracy in the predictions made by the AI model. Out of the 30 patients, the model accurately predicted treatment outcomes for 22 patients, yielding a success rate of approximately 73%. However, the model exhibited limitations in accurately predicting outcomes for cases involving complex malocclusions or those requiring non-standard treatment approaches. Conclusion: In conclusion, this study underscores the potential of AI models in predicting treatment outcomes in orthodontics. While the AI model demonstrated promising accuracy in the majority of cases, its efficacy was diminished in complex and non-standard cases. Therefore, while AI models can serve as valuable tools to aid orthodontists in treatment planning, they should be utilized in conjunction with clinical expertise to ensure optimal decision-making and patient care.
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.