OBJECTIVES: This article provides a brief overview of a general cell and specific stem cell analysis approaches from the history of cell discovery up to the state-of-the-art approaches.

METHODOLOGY: A content description of the literature study has been surveyed from specific manuscript databases using three review methods: manuscript identification, screening, and inclusion. This review methodology is based on Prism guidelines in searching for originality and novelty in studies concerning cell analysis.

RESULTS: By analysing generic cell and specific stem cell analysis approaches, current technology offers tremendous potential in assisting medical experts in performing cell analysis using a method that is less laborious, cost-effective, and reduces error rates.

Method: Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science (all databases) were searched by 2 reviewers until 29th October 2020. Articles were screened and narratively synthesized according to PRISMA-DTA guidelines based on predefined eligibility criteria. Articles that made direct reference test comparisons to human clinicians were evaluated using the MI-CLAIM checklist. The risk of bias was assessed by JBI-DTA critical appraisal, and certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Information regarding the quantification method of dental pain and disease, the conditional characteristics of both training and test data cohort in the machine learning, diagnostic outcomes, and diagnostic test comparisons with clinicians, where applicable, were extracted.

Results: 34 eligible articles were found for data synthesis, of which 8 articles made direct reference comparisons to human clinicians. 7 papers scored over 13 (out of the evaluated 15 points) in the MI-CLAIM approach with all papers scoring 5+ (out of 7) in JBI-DTA appraisals. GRADE approach revealed serious risks of bias and inconsistencies with most studies containing more positive cases than their true prevalence in order to facilitate machine learning. Patient-perceived symptoms and clinical history were generally found to be less reliable than radiographs or histology for training accurate machine learning models. A low agreement level between clinicians training the models was suggested to have a negative impact on the prediction accuracy. Reference comparisons found nonspecialized clinicians with less than 3 years of experience to be disadvantaged against trained models.

METHODS: The study was done at the International Medical University, Malaysia, and the University of Lahore, Pakistan. Semi-structured interviews were conducted from 1st August 2021 to 17th March 2022. Demographic information was noted. Themes were identified, and a summary of the information under each theme was created.

RESULTS: A total of 24 (14 from Malaysia and 10 from Pakistan) faculty participated. Most agreed that undergraduate medical students can progress (at a differential rate) if they attain the required competencies. Among the major advantages mentioned were that students may graduate faster, learn at a pace comfortable to them, and develop an individualized learning pathway. Several logistical challenges must be overcome. Providing assessments on demand will be difficult. Significant regulatory hurdles were anticipated. Artificial intelligence (AI) can play an important role in creating an individualized learning pathway and supporting time-independent progression. The course may be (slightly) cheaper than a traditional one.