
pmid: 38742569
pmc: PMC11154092
The utilization of segmentation method using volumetric data in adults dental age estimation (DAE) from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was further expanded by using current 5-Part Tooth Segmentation (SG) method. Additionally, supervised machine learning modelling -namely support vector regression (SVR) with linear and polynomial kernel, and regression tree - was tested and compared with the multiple linear regression model.CBCT scans from 99 patients aged between 20 to 59.99 was collected. Eighty eligible teeth including maxillary canine, lateral incisor, and central incisor were used in this study. Enamel to dentine volume ratio, pulp to dentine volume ratio, lower tooth volume ratio, and sex was utilized as independent variable to predict chronological age.No multicollinearity was detected in the models. The best performing model comes from maxillary lateral incisor using SVR with polynomial kernel ( = 0.73). The lowest error rate achieved by the model was given also by maxillary lateral incisor, with 4.86 years of mean average error and 6.05 years of root means squared error. However, demands a complex approach to segment the enamel volume in the crown section and a lengthier labour time of 45 minutes per tooth.
Adult, Male, Support Vector Machine, 610, Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, Middle Aged, Machine Learning, Young Adult, Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Dentin, 617, Linear Models, Humans, Female, Supervised Machine Learning, Age Determination by Teeth, Dental Enamel, Dental Pulp, Forensic Dentistry
Adult, Male, Support Vector Machine, 610, Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, Middle Aged, Machine Learning, Young Adult, Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Dentin, 617, Linear Models, Humans, Female, Supervised Machine Learning, Age Determination by Teeth, Dental Enamel, Dental Pulp, Forensic Dentistry
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
