An Application of Machine Learning Techniques to Analyze Patient Information to Improve Oral Health Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Various health-related fields have applied Machine learning (ML) techniques such as text mining, topic modeling (TM), and artificial neural networks (ANN) to automate tasks otherwise completed by humans to enhance patient care. However, research in dentistry on the integration of these techniques into the clinic arena has yet to exist. Thus, the purpose of this study was to: introduce a method of automating the reviewing patient chart information using ML, provide a step-by-step description of how it was conducted, and demonstrate this method's potential to identify predictive relationships between patient chart information and important oral health-related contributors. Methods A secondary data analysis was conducted to demonstrate the approach on a set of anonymized patient charts collected from a dental clinic. Two ML applications for patient chart review were demonstrated: (1) text mining and Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) were used to preprocess, model, and cluster data in a narrative format and extract common topics for further analysis, (2) Ordinal logistic regression (OLR) and ANN were used to determine predictive relationships between the extracted patient chart data topics and oral health-related contributors. All analysis was conducted in R and SPSS (IBM, SPSS, statistics 22). Results Data from 785 patient charts were analyzed. Preprocessing of raw data (data cleaning and categorizing) identified 66 variables, of which 45 were included for analysis. Using LDA, 10 radiographic findings topics and 8 treatment planning topics were extracted from the data. OLR showed that caries risk, occlusal risk, biomechanical risk, gingival recession, periodontitis, gingivitis, assisted mouth opening, and muscle tenderness were highly predictable using the extracted radiographic and treatment planning topics and chart information. Using the statistically significant predictors obtained from OLR, ANN analysis showed that the model can correctly predict >72% of all variables except for bruxism and tooth crowding (63.1 and 68.9%, respectively). Conclusion Our study presents a novel approach to address the need for data-enabled innovations in the field of dentistry and creates new areas of research in dental analytics. Utilizing ML methods and its application in dental practice has the potential to improve clinicians' and patients' understanding of the major factors that contribute to oral health diseases/conditions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".