Deep learning in oral surgery for third molar extraction: empirical evidence and original model

Figures & data

Table 1. Measurements of Central tendency and spread, and statistical inference of the self-reported pain levels, reported at different time points (3rd, 6th, 24th hour) after the first and second surgical extractions.

Time point	First Visit/Extraction	Second Visit/Extraction	p-value
3rd hour pain (points)–median; 25th, 75th percentiles	2.4; 0.9, 4.4	2.3; 0.4, 4.9	.948*
6th hour pain (points)–mean ± SD	5.0 ± 2.6	4.0 ± 3.0	.007**
24th hour pain (points)–median; 25th, 75th percentiles	1.8; 6.6, 4.4	1.1; 0.1, 3.9	.093*

Table 2. Statistically significant differences between the pain score (in points) reported at the three time points (3rd, 6th, 24th hours) by surgical procedure and medication group.

	3rd hour pain (points) – median; 25th, 75th percentiles	6th hour pain (points) – median; 25th, 75th percentiles	24th hour pain (points) – median; 25th, 75th percentiles	p-value
First Visit/Extraction
Placebo	3.9; 1.5, 8.7	5.4; 3.1, 8.0*	1.4; 0.7, 4.4*	.044
Ibuprofen	1.9; 0.5, 4.1*	4.1; 2.2, 6.6*	2.7; 0.5, 4.8	.005
Combo	2.5; 1.2, 4.6*	4.8; 3.4; 7.2*	1.7; 0.7, 4.7	.014
Second Visit/Extraction
Placebo	4.8; 2.6, 7.1*	4.8; 2.9, 9.0	1.1; 4.0, 6.2*	.016
Ibuprofen	1.7; 1.0, 3.2	3.1; 0.4, 5.3	0.8; 0.1, 3.8	0.62
Combo	1.7; 0.08, 2.3*	4.4; 0.9, 6.8*	1.6; 0.2, 4.4	.017

* pairwise comparisons – statistically significant differences.

Figure 1. Box-plot diagram of the pain by time point, visit, medication therapy and difficulty of the molar extraction.

Figure 2. Network architecture.

Figure 3. The loss function.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.