Takeshi Hase
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Takeshi Hase has a total of 7 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Kaoru Mogushi
Institute of Education, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo 1138510, Japan
1 shared publication - Noriyuki Wakabayashi
Professor, Department of Advanced Prosthodontics, Division of Oral Health Sciences, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Institute of Science Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
1 shared publication - Takeshi Hase
Institute of Education, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo 1138510, Japan
1 shared publication - Xuewei Han
Department of Advanced Prosthodontics, Graduate School, Medical and Dental Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo 1138510, Japan
1 shared publication - Yoritsugu Iida
Institute of Education, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo 1138510, Japan
1 shared publication - Yuka Iwakura Sumita
Department of Partial and Complete Denture, School of Life Dentistry at Tokyo, The Nippon Dental University
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 18 April 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Journal of Clinical Medicine
- Vol. 13 (8) , 2363
Machine Learning Prediction of Tongue Pressure in Elderly Patients with Head and Neck Tumor: A Cross-Sectional Study
Background: This investigation sought to cross validate the predictors of tongue pressure recovery in elderly patients’ post-treatment for head and neck tumors, leveraging advanced machine learning techniques. Methods: By employing logistic regression, support vector regression, random forest, and extreme gradient boosting, the study analyzed an array of variables including patient demographics, surgery types, dental health status, and age, drawn from comprehensive medical records and direct tongue pressure assessments. Results: Among the models, logistic regression emerged as the most effective, demonstrating an accuracy of 0.630 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.370–0.778], F1 score of 0.688 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.435–0.853], precision of 0.611 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.313–0.801], recall of 0.786 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.413–0.938] and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.626 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.409–0.806]. This model distinctly highlighted the significance of glossectomy (p = 0.039), the presence of functional teeth (p = 0.043), and the patient’s age (p = 0.044) as pivotal factors influencing tongue pressure, setting the threshold for statistical significance at p < 0.05. Conclusions: The analysis underscored the critical role of glossectomy, the presence of functional natural teeth, and age as determinants of tongue pressure in logistics regression, with the presence of natural teeth and the tumor site located in the tongue consistently emerging as the key predictors across all computational models employed in this study.
- 18 April 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Journal of Clinical Medicine
- Vol. 13 (8) , 2363
Open AccessMachine Learning Prediction of Tongue Pressure in Elderly Patients with Head and Neck Tumor: A Cross-Sectional Study
Background: This investigation sought to cross validate the predictors of tongue pressure recovery in elderly patients’ post-treatment for head and neck tumors, leveraging advanced machine learning techniques. Methods: By employing logistic regression, support vector regression, random forest, and extreme gradient boosting, the study analyzed an array of variables including patient demographics, surgery types, dental health status, and age, drawn from comprehensive medical records and direct tongue pressure assessments. Results: Among the models, logistic regression emerged as the most effective, demonstrating an accuracy of 0.630 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.370–0.778], F1 score of 0.688 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.435–0.853], precision of 0.611 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.313–0.801], recall of 0.786 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.413–0.938] and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.626 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.409–0.806]. This model distinctly highlighted the significance of glossectomy (p = 0.039), the presence of functional teeth (p = 0.043), and the patient’s age (p = 0.044) as pivotal factors influencing tongue pressure, setting the threshold for statistical significance at p < 0.05. Conclusions: The analysis underscored the critical role of glossectomy, the presence of functional natural teeth, and age as determinants of tongue pressure in logistics regression, with the presence of natural teeth and the tumor site located in the tongue consistently emerging as the key predictors across all computational models employed in this study.