Artificial Intelligence for Detecting Cephalometric Landmarks: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Using computer vision through artificial intelligence (AI) is one of the main technological advances in dentistry. However, the existing literature on the practical application of AI for detecting cephalometric landmarks of orthodontic interest in digital images is heterogeneous, and there is no con...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of Digital Imaging Vol. 36; no. 3; pp. 1158 - 1180
Autores principales: de Queiroz Tavares Borges Mesquita, Germana, Vieira, Walbert A., Vidigal, Maria Tereza Campos, Travençolo, Bruno Augusto Nassif, Beaini, Thiago Leite, Spin-Neto, Rubens, Paranhos, Luiz Renato, de Brito Júnior, Rui Barbosa
Formato: meta analysis pictorial research systematic review tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Springer Nature Jun2023
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=164473094&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 164473094
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        08971889
        DOQ
      jtl: Journal of Digital Imaging
      issn: 08971889
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jun2023
      vid: 36
      iid: 3
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
      place: New York, New York
    artinfo:
      ui:
        164473094
        161152664
        164473094
        164473094
        10.1007/s10278-022-00766-w
        164473094
      ppf: 1158
      ppct: 22
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
      tig:
        atl: Artificial Intelligence for Detecting Cephalometric Landmarks: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
      aug:
        au:
          de Queiroz Tavares Borges Mesquita, Germana
          Vieira, Walbert A.
          Vidigal, Maria Tereza Campos
          Travençolo, Bruno Augusto Nassif
          Beaini, Thiago Leite
          Spin-Neto, Rubens
          Paranhos, Luiz Renato
          de Brito Júnior, Rui Barbosa
        affil: Postgraduate Program in Dentistry, School of Dentistry, São Leopoldo Mandic, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
      sug:
        subj:
          Cephalometry Evaluation
          Artificial Intelligence Utilization
          Human
          Systematic Review
          Meta Analysis
          Embase
          Medline
          PubMed
          Gray Literature
          Dentistry
          Deep Learning
          Data Analysis Software
          Quality Assessment
          Confidence Intervals
          Descriptive Statistics
          Funding Source
      ab: Using computer vision through artificial intelligence (AI) is one of the main technological advances in dentistry. However, the existing literature on the practical application of AI for detecting cephalometric landmarks of orthodontic interest in digital images is heterogeneous, and there is no consensus regarding accuracy and precision. Thus, this review evaluated the use of artificial intelligence for detecting cephalometric landmarks in digital imaging examinations and compared it to manual annotation of landmarks. An electronic search was performed in nine databases to find studies that analyzed the detection of cephalometric landmarks in digital imaging examinations with AI and manual landmarking. Two reviewers selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias using QUADAS-2. Random-effects meta-analyses determined the agreement and precision of AI compared to manual detection at a 95% confidence interval. The electronic search located 7410 studies, of which 40 were included. Only three studies presented a low risk of bias for all domains evaluated. The meta-analysis showed AI agreement rates of 79% (95% CI: 76–82%, I2 = 99%) and 90% (95% CI: 87–92%, I2 = 99%) for the thresholds of 2 and 3 mm, respectively, with a mean divergence of 2.05 (95% CI: 1.41–2.69, I2 = 10%) compared to manual landmarking. The menton cephalometric landmark showed the lowest divergence between both methods (SMD, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.82; 1.53; I2 = 0%). Based on very low certainty of evidence, the application of AI was promising for automatically detecting cephalometric landmarks, but further studies should focus on testing its strength and validity in different samples.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        meta analysis
        pictorial
        research
        systematic review
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N