Federated vs Local vs Central Deep Learning of Tooth Segmentation on Panoramic Radiographs.

OBJECTIVE: Federated Learning (FL) enables collaborative training of artificial intelligence (AI) models from multiple data sources without directly sharing data. Due to the large amount of sensitive data in dentistry, FL may be particularly relevant for oral and dental research and applications. This study, for the first time, employed FL for a dental task, automated tooth segmentation on panoramic radiographs. METHODS: We employed a dataset of 4,177 panoramic radiographs collected from nine different centers (n = 143 to n = 1881 per center) across the globe and used FL to train a machine learning model for tooth segmentation. FL performance was compared against Local Learning (LL), i.e., training models on isolated data from each center (assuming data sharing not to be an option). Further, the performance gap to Central Learning (CL), i.e., training on centrally pooled data (based on data sharing agreements) was quantified. Generalizability of models was evaluated on a pooled test dataset from all centers. RESULTS: For 8 out of 9 centers, FL outperformed LL with statistical significance (p<0.05); only the center providing the largest amount of data FL did not have such an advantage. For generalizability, FL outperformed LL across all centers. CL surpassed both FL and LL for performance and generalizability. CONCLUSION: If data pooling (for CL) is not feasible, FL is shown to be a useful alternative to train performant and, more importantly, generalizable deep learning models in dentistry, where data protection barriers are high. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study proves the validity and utility of FL in the field of dentistry, which encourages researchers to adopt this method to improve the generalizability of dental AI models and ease their transition to the clinical environment.

Artificial intelligence for oral and dental healthcare: Core education curriculum.

OBJECTIVES: Artificial intelligence (AI) is swiftly entering oral health services and dentistry, while most providers show limited knowledge and skills to appraise dental AI applications. We aimed to define a core curriculum for both undergraduate and postgraduate education, establishing a minimum set of outcomes learners should acquire when taught about oral and dental AI. METHODS: Existing curricula and other documents focusing on literacy of medical professionals around AI were screened and relevant items extracted. Items were scoped and adapted using expert interviews with members of the IADR's e-oral health group, the ITU/WHO's Focus Group AI for Health and the Association for Dental Education in Europe. Learning outcome levels were defined and each item assigned to a level. Items were systematized into domains and a curricular structure defined. The resulting curriculum was consented using an online Delphi process. RESULTS: Four domains of learning outcomes emerged, with most outcomes being on the "knowledge" level: (1) Basic definitions and terms, the reasoning behind AI and the principle of machine learning, the idea of training, validating and testing models, the definition of reference tests, the contrast between dynamic and static AI, and the problem of AI being a black box and requiring explainability should be known. (2) Use cases, the required types of AI to address them, and the typical setup of AI software for dental purposes should be taught. (3) Evaluation metrics, their interpretation, the relevant impact of AI on patient or societal health outcomes and associated examples should be considered. (4) Issues around generalizability and representativeness, explainability, autonomy and accountability and the need for governance should be highlighted. CONCLUSION: Both educators and learners should consider this core curriculum during planning, conducting and evaluating oral and dental AI education. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: A core curriculum on oral and dental AI may help to increase oral and dental healthcare providers' literacy around AI, allowing them to critically appraise AI applications and to use them consciously and on an informed basis.

Emulating Clinical Diagnostic Reasoning for Jaw Cysts with Machine Learning.

The detection and classification of cystic lesions of the jaw is of high clinical relevance and represents a topic of interest in medical artificial intelligence research. The human clinical diagnostic reasoning process uses contextual information, including the spatial relation of the detected lesion to other anatomical structures, to establish a preliminary classification. Here, we aimed to emulate clinical diagnostic reasoning step by step by using a combined object detection and image segmentation approach on panoramic radiographs (OPGs). We used a multicenter training dataset of 855 OPGs (all positives) and an evaluation set of 384 OPGs (240 negatives). We further compared our models to an international human control group of ten dental professionals from seven countries. The object detection model achieved an average precision of 0.42 (intersection over union (IoU): 0.50, maximal detections: 100) and an average recall of 0.394 (IoU: 0.50-0.95, maximal detections: 100). The classification model achieved a sensitivity of 0.84 for odontogenic cysts and 0.56 for non-odontogenic cysts as well as a specificity of 0.59 for odontogenic cysts and 0.84 for non-odontogenic cysts (IoU: 0.30). The human control group achieved a sensitivity of 0.70 for odontogenic cysts, 0.44 for non-odontogenic cysts, and 0.56 for OPGs without cysts as well as a specificity of 0.62 for odontogenic cysts, 0.95 for non-odontogenic cysts, and 0.76 for OPGs without cysts. Taken together, our results show that a combined object detection and image segmentation approach is feasible in emulating the human clinical diagnostic reasoning process in classifying cystic lesions of the jaw.