• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Comparison of individualized facial growth prediction models using artificial intelligence and partial least squares based on the Mathews growth collection.基于马修斯生长数据集,对使用人工智能和偏最小二乘法的个性化面部生长预测模型进行比较。
Angle Orthod. 2025 May 1;95(3):249-258. doi: 10.2319/082124-687.1.
2
Comparison of individualized facial growth prediction models based on the partial least squares and artificial intelligence.基于偏最小二乘法和人工智能的个体化面部生长预测模型比较。
Angle Orthod. 2024 Mar 1;94(2):207-215. doi: 10.2319/031723-181.1.
3
Does artificial intelligence predict orthognathic surgical outcomes better than conventional linear regression methods?人工智能预测正颌手术结果是否优于传统线性回归方法?
Angle Orthod. 2024 Sep 1;94(5):549-556. doi: 10.2319/111423-756.1.
4
Orthodontic treatment outcome predictive performance differences between artificial intelligence and conventional methods.正畸治疗结果预测性能的人工智能与传统方法比较。
Angle Orthod. 2024 Sep 1;94(5):557-565. doi: 10.2319/111823-767.1.
5
Accuracy of artificial intelligence-assisted growth prediction in skeletal Class I preadolescent patients using serial lateral cephalograms for a 2-year growth interval.利用 2 年生长间隔的系列侧位头颅侧位片预测骨骼 I 类青春期前患者生长的人工智能准确性。
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2024 Aug;27(4):535-543. doi: 10.1111/ocr.12764. Epub 2024 Feb 6.
6
Evaluation of an individualized facial growth prediction model based on the multivariate partial least squares method.基于多元偏最小二乘法的个体化面部生长预测模型评估。
Angle Orthod. 2022 Nov 1;92(6):705-713. doi: 10.2319/110121-807.1.
7
Craniofacial growth prediction models based on cephalometric landmarks in Korean and American children.基于韩国和美国儿童头影测量标志点的颅面生长预测模型。
Angle Orthod. 2025 Mar 1;95(2):219-226. doi: 10.2319/052324-399.1.
8
Evaluation of automated photograph-cephalogram image integration using artificial intelligence models.利用人工智能模型评估自动拍摄的头颅 X 光片图像整合。
Angle Orthod. 2024 Nov 1;94(6):595-601. doi: 10.2319/010124-1.1.
9
Automated identification of cephalometric landmarks:自动识别头影测量标志点:
Angle Orthod. 2020 Jan;90(1):69-76. doi: 10.2319/022019-129.1. Epub 2019 Jul 22.
10
Research of orthodontic soft tissue profile prediction based on conditional generative adversarial networks.基于条件生成对抗网络的正畸软组织侧貌预测研究
J Dent. 2025 Mar;154:105570. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105570. Epub 2025 Jan 24.

引用本文的文献

1
What amount of data is required to develop artificial intelligence that can accurately predict soft tissue changes after orthognathic surgery?开发能够准确预测正颌手术后软组织变化的人工智能需要多少数据?
Angle Orthod. 2025 Jun 18;95(5):467-473. doi: 10.2319/010125-1. eCollection 2025 Sep.

本文引用的文献

1
Does artificial intelligence predict orthognathic surgical outcomes better than conventional linear regression methods?人工智能预测正颌手术结果是否优于传统线性回归方法?
Angle Orthod. 2024 Sep 1;94(5):549-556. doi: 10.2319/111423-756.1.
2
Factors influencing the development of artificial intelligence in orthodontics.影响正畸学中人工智能发展的因素。
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2024 Dec;27 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):6-12. doi: 10.1111/ocr.12806. Epub 2024 May 7.
3
Comparison of individualized facial growth prediction models based on the partial least squares and artificial intelligence.基于偏最小二乘法和人工智能的个体化面部生长预测模型比较。
Angle Orthod. 2024 Mar 1;94(2):207-215. doi: 10.2319/031723-181.1.
4
Evaluation of an individualized facial growth prediction model based on the multivariate partial least squares method.基于多元偏最小二乘法的个体化面部生长预测模型评估。
Angle Orthod. 2022 Nov 1;92(6):705-713. doi: 10.2319/110121-807.1.
5
Evaluation of an automated superimposition method based on multiple landmarks for growing patients.基于多个标志点的生长患者自动配准方法的评估。
Angle Orthod. 2022 Mar 1;92(2):226-232. doi: 10.2319/010121-1.1.
6
Genetic and environmental components of vertical growth in mono- and dizygotic twins up to 15-18 years of age.15-18 岁单卵和双卵双胞胎垂直生长的遗传和环境因素。
Angle Orthod. 2021 May 1;91(3):384-390. doi: 10.2319/060520-515.1.
7
Evaluation of automated cephalometric analysis based on the latest deep learning method.基于最新深度学习方法的自动头影测量分析评估。
Angle Orthod. 2021 May 1;91(3):329-335. doi: 10.2319/021220-100.1.
8
How much deep learning is enough for automatic identification to be reliable?深度学习达到多少才能保证自动识别的可靠性?
Angle Orthod. 2020 Nov 1;90(6):823-830. doi: 10.2319/021920-116.1.
9
Evaluation of an automated superimposition method for computer-aided cephalometrics.自动叠加法在计算机辅助头影测量中的评价。
Angle Orthod. 2020 May 1;90(3):390-396. doi: 10.2319/071319-469.1.
10
Bayesian approach to longitudinal craniofacial growth: The Craniofacial Growth Consortium Study.贝叶斯方法在颅面纵向生长中的应用:颅面生长研究联合体研究。
Anat Rec (Hoboken). 2021 May;304(5):991-1019. doi: 10.1002/ar.24520. Epub 2020 Oct 12.

基于马修斯生长数据集,对使用人工智能和偏最小二乘法的个性化面部生长预测模型进行比较。

Comparison of individualized facial growth prediction models using artificial intelligence and partial least squares based on the Mathews growth collection.

作者信息

Roseth Jeffrey, Kim Jong-Hak, Moon Jun-Ho, Ko Dong-Yub, Oh Heesoo, Lee Shin-Jae, Suh Heeyeon

出版信息

Angle Orthod. 2025 May 1;95(3):249-258. doi: 10.2319/082124-687.1.

DOI:10.2319/082124-687.1
PMID:39884314
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12017544/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To develop facial growth prediction models using artificial intelligence (AI) under various conditions, and to compare performance of these models with each other as well as with the partial least squares (PLS) growth prediction model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Longitudinal lateral cephalograms from 33 subjects in the Mathews growth collection were utilized. A total of 1257 pairs of before and after growth lateral cephalograms were included. In each image, 46 hard and 32 soft tissue landmarks were manually identified. Growth prediction models were constructed using a deep learning method based on TabNet deep neural network and partial least squares (PLS) method. Prediction accuracies of the two methods were compared.

RESULTS

On average, artificial intelligence (AI) showed 0.61 mm less prediction error than PLS. Among the 77 predicted landmarks, AI was more accurate than PLS in 60 landmarks. When comparing AI models with varying numbers of training epochs, those with higher epochs yielded more accurate predictions. Overall, PLS and AI exhibited greater prediction errors for soft tissue and mandibular landmarks compared to hard tissue and maxillary landmarks. However, AI showed a smaller increase in prediction error in areas with greater variability.

CONCLUSIONS

AI proved to be a valuable growth prediction method, with clinically acceptable prediction errors averaging 1.49 mm for 45 hard tissue landmarks and 1.71 mm for 32 soft tissue landmarks. PLS accurately predicted landmarks with low variability. However, AI generally outperformed PLS, particularly for landmarks in the lower part of the craniofacial structure and soft tissue, where uncertainty is considerable.

摘要

目的

在各种条件下使用人工智能(AI)开发面部生长预测模型,并将这些模型的性能相互比较,同时与偏最小二乘法(PLS)生长预测模型进行比较。

材料和方法

使用了来自Mathews生长数据集的33名受试者的纵向侧位头影测量片。总共纳入了1257对生长前后的侧位头影测量片。在每张图像中,手动识别了46个硬组织和32个软组织标志点。使用基于TabNet深度神经网络的深度学习方法和偏最小二乘法(PLS)构建生长预测模型。比较了两种方法的预测准确性。

结果

平均而言,人工智能(AI)的预测误差比PLS少0.61毫米。在77个预测标志点中,AI在60个标志点上比PLS更准确。在比较不同训练轮次的AI模型时,轮次较高的模型预测更准确。总体而言,与硬组织和上颌标志点相比,PLS和AI在软组织和下颌标志点上表现出更大的预测误差。然而,AI在变异性较大的区域预测误差增加较小。

结论

事实证明,AI是一种有价值的生长预测方法,对于45个硬组织标志点,临床可接受的预测误差平均为1.49毫米,对于32个软组织标志点,平均为1.71毫米。PLS能准确预测变异性低的标志点。然而,AI总体上优于PLS,特别是对于颅面结构下部和软组织中的标志点,这些部位的不确定性相当大。