Caries Detection in Primary Teeth Using Intraoral Scanners Featuring Fluorescence: Protocol for a Diagnostic Agreement Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Digital methods that enable early caries identification can streamline data collection in research and optimize dental examinations for young children. Intraoral scanners are devices used for creating 3D models of teeth in dentistry and are being rapidly adopted into clinical workflows. Integrating fluorescence technology into scanner hardware can support early caries detection. However, the performance of caries detection methods using 3D models featuring color and fluorescence in primary teeth is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the diagnostic agreement between visual examination (VE), on-screen assessment of 3D models in approximate natural colors with and without fluorescence, and application of an automated caries scoring system to the 3D models with fluorescence for caries detection in primary teeth. METHODS: The study sample will be drawn from eligible participants in a randomized controlled trial at the Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, where a dental assessment was conducted, including VE using the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) and intraoral scan using the TRIOS 4 (3Shape TRIOS A/S). Participant clinical records will be collected, and all records meeting eligibility criteria will be subject to an on-screen assessment of 3D models by 4 dental practitioners. First, all primary tooth surfaces will be examined for caries based on 3D geometry and color, using a merged ICDAS index. Second, the on-screen assessment of 3D models will include fluorescence, where caries will be classified using a merged ICDAS index that has been modified to incorporate fluorescence criteria. After 4 weeks, all examiners will repeat the on-screen assessment for all 3D models. Finally, an automated caries scoring system will be used to classify caries on primary occlusal surfaces. The agreement in the total number of caries detected per person between methods will be assessed using a Bland-Altman analysis and intraclass correlation coefficients. At a tooth surface level, agreement between methods will be estimated using multilevel models to account for the clustering of dental data. RESULTS: Automated caries scoring of 3D models was completed as of October 2023, with the publication of results expected by July 2024. On-screen assessment has commenced, with the expected completion of scoring and data analysis by March 2024. Results will be disseminated by the end of 2024. CONCLUSIONS: The study outcomes may inform new practices that use digital models to facilitate dental assessments. Novel approaches that enable remote dental examination without compromising the accuracy of VE have wide applications in the research environment, clinical practice, and the provision of teledentistry. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12622001237774; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=384632. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/51578.
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 | 0.102 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.014 |
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".