JOURNAL TOOLS |
Publishing options |
eTOC |
To subscribe |
Submit an article |
Recommend to your librarian |
ARTICLE TOOLS |
Publication history |
Reprints |
Permissions |
Cite this article as |
Share |
YOUR ACCOUNT
YOUR ORDERS
SHOPPING BASKET
Items: 0
Total amount: € 0,00
HOW TO ORDER
YOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS
YOUR ARTICLES
YOUR EBOOKS
COUPON
ACCESSIBILITY
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Minerva Dental and Oral Science 2021 February;70(1):7-14
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6329.20.04416-7
Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
language: English
A new software architecture proposal for an evidence-based Decision Support System in dentistry
Giuseppe LO GIUDICE 1 ✉, Angelo S. LIZIO 1, Roberto LO GIUDICE 2
1 Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morphofunctional Imaging, G. Martino University Hospital, University of Messina, Messina, Italy; 2 Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
BACKGROUND: in dentistry, clinical problems could be resolved using many therapeutic approaches that may results in very different therapies. In order to choose the best option, a good evaluation of therapy long-term survival and success rate is mandatory. The routine use of a decision support analysis software is nowadays limited due to the lack of software’s flexibility especially when a variety of possible therapeutic option are present. The aim of this research was to develop a new algorithm model for a Decision Support System software to give diagnosis support in dentistry.
METHODS: Beta tests were designed to study the computer software in different clinical situations based on clinical data. The therapeutic options can be conservative/endodontic or extractive/prosthetic therapies. In two of clinical situation selected could be possible to choose both therapies.
RESULTS: in clinical situations tested, the DDS software correctly identified the several therapeutic options. When multiple treatments were possible the beta test showed an output mask that correctly showed a range of options with their corresponding survival and success rate.
CONCLUSIONS: The software architecture proposed by the authors is technically feasible, can support the clinician choices based on scientific evidence and up-to-date references and gain informed consent based on data easily understandable for the patient.
KEY WORDS: Software; Dental caries; Prostheses and implants; Preventive dentistry