MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400341832 · doi:10.25259/apos_73_2024

Deep learning models to classify skeletal growth phase on 3D radiographs

2024· article· en· W4400341832 on OpenAlexaff
Nazila Ameli, Manuel O. Lagravère, Hollis Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueAPOS Trends in Orthodontics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Deep learningPhase (matter)Range (aeronautics)Class (philosophy)Machine learningCervical vertebraeAnatomyMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) is widely used to evaluate growth potential in orthodontics. This study aims to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm that automatically predicts the CVM stages in terms of growth phases using cone-beam computed tomography images. Material and Methods: A total of 30,016 slices were obtained from 56 patients with an age range of 7–16 years. After cropping the region of interest, a convolutional neural network (CNN) was built to classify the slices based on the presence of a good vision of vertebrae. The output was used to train another model capable of categorizing the slices into phases of growth, which were defined as Phase I (prepubertal), Phase II (circumpubertal), and Phase III (postpubertal). After training the model, 88 new images were used to evaluate the performance of the model using multi-class classification metrics. Results: The average classification accuracy of the first and second CNN-based deep learning models was 96.06% and 95.79%, respectively. The multi-class classification metrics also showed an overall accuracy of 84% for predicting the growth phase in unseen data. Moreover, Phase I ranked the highest accuracy in terms of F1-score (87%), followed by Phase II (83%) and Phase III (80%). Conclusion: Our proposed models could automatically detect the C2–C4 vertebrae and accurately classify slices into three growth phases without the need for annotating the shape and configuration of vertebrae. This will result in the development of a fully automatic and less complex system with reasonable performance.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAPOS Trends in OrthodonticsSame topicDental Radiography and ImagingFrench-language works237,207