Scholarlink

<p>To provide the public and non-specialist readers with clear insight, we re-evaluate a published study claiming that artificial intelligence (AI) software performs as accurately as orthodontist experts in identifying key points on dental X-ray images. Our analysis reveals flaws in the original research methods: inconsistent image processing led to unreliable measurements, and critical details about data sources were missing. Most importantly, when we repeated the experiment with new X-ray images and protocols, over 80% of the AI’s landmark identifications showed significantly higher error rates than originally reported—contradicting the claim that AI matches expert accuracy. We urge methodological rigor in future studies on AI’s role in dentistry.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Reassessing the validity of AI cephalometric landmark identification: an analytical perspective on Ye et al. (2023)

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年8月3日

查看全文
  • Jiangwei Liao,
  • Jinghong Yu,
  • Fulin Jiang

摘要

To provide the public and non-specialist readers with clear insight, we re-evaluate a published study claiming that artificial intelligence (AI) software performs as accurately as orthodontist experts in identifying key points on dental X-ray images. Our analysis reveals flaws in the original research methods: inconsistent image processing led to unreliable measurements, and critical details about data sources were missing. Most importantly, when we repeated the experiment with new X-ray images and protocols, over 80% of the AI’s landmark identifications showed significantly higher error rates than originally reported—contradicting the claim that AI matches expert accuracy. We urge methodological rigor in future studies on AI’s role in dentistry.