Robert Gaudin

Dr. Robert Gaudin

Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

11Years (2016-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 September 2020 in Journal of Dentistry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ACAnselmo Garcia Cantu
Anselmo Garcia Cantu
SGSascha Gehrung
Sascha Gehrung
JKJoachim Krois
Joachim Krois
Akhilanand ChaurasiaAkhilanand Chaurasia
Akhilanand Chaurasia
JRJesus Gomez Rossi
Jesus Gomez Rossi
Falk SchwendickeFalk Schwendicke
Falk Schwendicke

31 July 2016 in BioMed Research International
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RGRobert Gaudin
Robert Gaudin
CKChristian Knipfer
Christian Knipfer
Anders HenningsenAnders Henningsen
Anders Henningsen
Ralf SmeetsRalf Smeets
Ralf Smeets
Max HeilandMax Heiland
Max Heiland
THTessa Hadlock
Tessa Hadlock
Peripheral nerve injury is a common clinical entity, which may arise due to traumatic, tumorous, or even iatrogenic injury in craniomaxillofacial surgery. Despite advances in biomaterials and techniques over the past several decades, reconstruction of nerve gaps remains a challenge. Autografts are the gold standard for nerve reconstruction. Using autografts, there is donor site morbidity, subsequent sensory deficit, and potential for neuroma development and infection. Moreover, the need for a second surgical site and limited availability of donor nerves remain a challenge. Thus, increasing efforts have been directed to develop artificial nerve guidance conduits (ANCs) as new methods to replace autografts in the future. Various synthetic conduit materials have been testedin vitroandin vivo,and several first- and second-generation conduits are FDA approved and available for purchase, while third-generation conduits still remain in experimental stages. This paper reviews the current treatment options, summarizes the published literature, and assesses future prospects for the repair of peripheral nerve injury in craniomaxillofacial surgery with a particular focus on facial nerve regeneration.

24 June 2020 in Diagnostics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MEMichael Endres
Michael Endres
FHFlorian Hillen
Florian Hillen
MSMarios Salloumis
Marios Salloumis
Ahmad SedaghatAhmad Sedaghat
Ahmad Sedaghat
SNStefan Niehues
Stefan Niehues
RGRobert Gaudin
Robert Gaudin
Periapical radiolucencies, which can be detected on panoramic radiographs, are one of the most common radiographic findings in dentistry and have a differential diagnosis including infections, granuloma, cysts and tumors. In this study, we seek to investigate the ability with which 24 oral and maxillofacial (OMF) surgeons assess the presence of periapical lucencies on panoramic radiographs, and we compare these findings to the performance of a predictive deep learning algorithm that we have developed using a curated data set of 2902 de-identified panoramic radiographs. The mean diagnostic positive predictive value (PPV) of OMF surgeons based on their assessment of panoramic radiographic images was 0.69 (±0.13), indicating that dentists on average falsely diagnose 31% of cases as radiolucencies. However, the mean diagnostic true positive rate (TPR) was 0.51 (±0.14), indicating that on average 49% of all radiolucencies were missed. We demonstrate that the deep learning algorithm achieves a better performance than 14 of 24 OMF surgeons within the cohort, exhibiting an average precision of 0.60 (±0.04), and an F1 score of 0.58 (±0.04) corresponding to a PPV of 0.67 (±0.05) and TPR of 0.51 (±0.05). The algorithm, trained on limited data and evaluated on clinically validated ground truth, has potential to assist OMF surgeons in detecting periapical lucencies on panoramic radiographs.

1 September 2018 in Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SASuad Aljohani
Suad Aljohani
RGRobert Gaudin
Robert Gaudin
JWJulian Weiser
Julian Weiser
MTMatthias Tröltzsch
Matthias Tröltzsch
MEMichael Ehrenfeld
Michael Ehrenfeld
SOSven Otto
Sven Otto

12 April 2022 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
EKEsra Kosan
Esra Kosan
JKJoachim Krois
Joachim Krois
KWKatja Wingenfeld
Katja Wingenfeld
CDChristian Eric Deuter
Christian Eric Deuter
RGRobert Gaudin
Robert Gaudin
Falk SchwendickeFalk Schwendicke
Falk Schwendicke
Background: As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly important in modern dentistry, we aimed to assess patients’ perspectives on AI in dentistry specifically for radiographic caries detection and the impact of AI-based diagnosis on patients’ trust. Methods: Validated questionnaires with Likert-scale batteries (1: “strongly disagree” to 5: “strongly agree”) were used to query participants’ experiences with dental radiographs and their knowledge/attitudes towards AI as well as to assess how AI-based communication of a diagnosis impacted their trust, belief, and understanding. Analyses of variance and ordinal logistic regression (OLR) were used (p < 0.05). Results: Patients were convinced that “AI is useful” (mean Likert ± standard deviation 4.2 ± 0.8) and did not fear AI in general (2.2 ± 1.0) nor in dentistry (1.6 ± 0.8). Age, education, and employment status were significantly associated with patients’ attitudes towards AI for dental diagnostics. When shown a radiograph with a caries lesion highlighted by an arrow, patients recognized the lesion significantly less often than when using AI-generated coloured overlays highlighting the lesion (p < 0.0005). AI-based communication did not significantly affect patients’ trust in dentists’ diagnosis (p = 0.44; OLR). Conclusions: Patients showed a positive attitude towards AI in dentistry. AI-supported diagnostics may assist communicating radiographic findings by increasing patients’ ability to recognize caries lesions on dental radiographs.

21 August 2019 in JMIR Medical Education
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MBMartina Bientzle
Martina Bientzle
EHEmrah Hircin
Emrah Hircin
Joachim KimmerleJoachim Kimmerle
Joachim Kimmerle
FSFlorian Stelzle
Florian Stelzle
Ralf SmeetsRalf Smeets
Ralf Smeets
PHPeter Holtz
Peter Holtz
Background: Digital learning environments have become very common in the training of medical professionals, and students often use such platforms for exam preparation. Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are a common format in medical exams and are used by students to prepare for said exams. Objective: We aimed to examine whether particular learning activities contributed more strongly than others to users’ exam performance. Methods: We analyzed data from users of an online platform that provides learning materials for medical students in preparation for their final exams. We analyzed whether the number of learning cards viewed and the number of MCQs taken were positively related to learning outcomes. We also examined whether viewing learning cards or answering MCQs was more effective. Finally, we tested whether taking individual notes predicted learning outcomes, and whether taking notes had an effect after controlling for the effects of learning cards and MCQs. Our analyses from the online platform Amboss are based on user activity data, which supplied the number of learning cards studied and test questions answered. We also included the number of notes from each of those 23,633 users who had studied at least 200 learning cards and had answered at least 1000 test exam questions in the 180 days before their state exam. The activity data for this analysis was collected retrospectively, using Amboss archival usage data from April 2014 to April 2017. Learning outcomes were measured using the final state exam scores that were calculated by using the answers voluntarily entered by the participants. Results: We found correlations between the number of cards studied (r=.22; P<.001) and the number of test questions that had been answered (r=.23; P<.001) with the percentage of correct answers in the learners’ medical exams. The number of test questions answered still yielded a significant effect, even after controlling for the number of learning cards studied using a hierarchical regression analysis (β=.14; P<.001; ΔR2=.017; P<.001). We found a negative interaction between the number of learning cards and MCQs, indicating that users with high scores for learning cards and MCQs had the highest exam scores. Those 8040 participants who had taken at least one note had a higher percentage of correct answers (80.94%; SD=7.44) than those who had not taken any notes (78.73%; SD=7.80; t23631=20.95; P<.001). In a stepwise regression, the number of notes the participants had taken predicted the percentage of correct answers over and above the effect of the number of learning cards studied and of the number of test questions entered in step one (β=.06; P<.001; ΔR2=.004; P<.001). Conclusions: These results show that online learning platforms are particularly helpful whenever learners engage in active elaboration in learning material, such as by answering MCQs or taking notes.