Research Article
The Validity and Reliability of Automatic Tooth Segmentation Generated Using Artificial Intelligence
Table 6
Difference between CephX, DICOM, and IOS for the upper and lower teeth in the labiolingual aspect.
| Labiolingual | Tooth no. | CephX | DICOM | IOS | Sig. | ICC | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | CephX -DICOM | CephX -IOS | DICOM-IOS |
| Maxilla | 1 | 3.45 | 0.39 | 3.37 | 0.37 | 3.51 | 0.32 | 0.831 | 0.818 | 0.822 | 0.598 | 2 | 3.12 | 0.33 | 3.08 | 0.23 | 3.05 | 0.39 | 0.588 | 0.885 | 0.891 | 0.923 | 3 | 4.77 | 0.6 | 4.97 | 0.65 | 4.81 | 0.6 | 0.856 | 0.953 | 0.957 | 0.961 | 4 | 9.54 | 0.63 | 9.40 | 0.56 | 9.59 | 0.77 | 0.889 | 0.851 | 0.858 | 0.804 | 5 | 9.39 | 0.33 | 9.38 | 0.16 | 9.37 | 0.43 | 0.683 | 0.866 | 0.870 | 0.848 | 6 | 11.42 | 0.78 | 11.37 | 0.42 | 11.6 | 0.56 | 0.822 | 0.767 | 0.771 | 0.566 | 7 | 11.02 | 0.60 | 11.37 | 0.34 | 10.9 | 0.60 | 0.373 | 0.671 | 0.677 | 0.629 |
| Mandible | 1 | 2.71 | 0.41 | 2.78 | 0.49 | 2.64 | 0.54 | 0.895 | 0.952 | 0.953 | 0.935 | 2 | 2.63 | 0.21 | 2.76 | 0.41 | 2.46 | 0.20 | 0.288 | 0.828 | 0.829 | 0.679 | 3 | 4.40 | 0.72 | 4.44 | 0.40 | 4.13 | 0.95 | 0.767 | 0.869 | 0.876 | 0.533 | 4 | 7.27 | 0.33 | 7.67 | 0.16 | 6.95 | 1.00 | 0.214 | 0.545 | 0.552 | 0.201 | 5 | 8.23 | 0.26 | 8.40 | 0.24 | 8.14 | 0.61 | 0.603 | 0.241 | 0.771 | 0.767 | 6 | 10.19 | 0.64 | 10.40 | 0.35 | 10.07 | 0.64 | 0.653 | 0.758 | 0.782 | 0.778 | 7 | 10.02 | 0.68 | 10.17 | 0.43 | 9.80 | 0.84 | 0.691 | 0.933 | 0.943 | 0.812 |
| Total agreement (ICC) | 0.781 | 0.825 | 0.717 |
|
|