| Autor: |
Kazimierczak W; Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun, Jagiellońska 13-15, 85-067 Bydgoszcz, Poland.; Kazimierczak Private Medical Practice, Dworcowa 13/u6a, 85-009 Bydgoszcz, Poland., Jedliński M; Department of Interdisciplinary Dentistry, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland., Issa J; Chair of Practical Clinical Dentistry, Department of Diagnostics, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, 61-701 Poznań, Poland., Kazimierczak N; Kazimierczak Private Medical Practice, Dworcowa 13/u6a, 85-009 Bydgoszcz, Poland., Janiszewska-Olszowska J; Department of Interdisciplinary Dentistry, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland., Dyszkiewicz-Konwińska M; Chair of Practical Clinical Dentistry, Department of Diagnostics, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, 61-701 Poznań, Poland., Różyło-Kalinowska I; Department of Dental and Maxillofacial Radiodiagnostics, Medical University of Lublin, 20-093 Lublin, Poland., Serafin Z; Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun, Jagiellońska 13-15, 85-067 Bydgoszcz, Poland., Orhan K; Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, Ankara 06500, Turkey.; Medical Design Application and Research Center (MEDITAM), Ankara University, Ankara 06500, Turkey.; Department of Oral Diagnostics, Faculty of Dentistry, Semmelweis University, 1088 Budapest, Hungary. |
| Abstrakt: |
Background/Objectives: To systematically review and summarize the existing scientific evidence on the diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence (AI) in assessing cervical vertebral maturation (CVM). This review aimed to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of AI algorithms in comparison to those of experienced clinicians. Methods: Comprehensive searches were conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase, using a combination of Boolean operators and MeSH terms. The inclusion criteria were cross-sectional studies with neural network research, reporting diagnostic accuracy, and involving human subjects. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers, with a third reviewer resolving any disagreements. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 tool was used for bias assessment. Results: Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria, predominantly employing supervised learning techniques, especially convolutional neural networks (CNNs). The diagnostic accuracy of AI models for CVM assessment varied widely, ranging from 57% to 95%. The factors influencing accuracy included the type of AI model, training data, and study methods. Geographic concentration and variability in the experience of radiograph readers also impacted the results. Conclusions: AI has considerable potential for enhancing the accuracy and reliability of CVM assessments in orthodontics. However, the variability in AI performance and the limited number of high-quality studies suggest the need for further research. |
