More controversial answer: dialectics is not that useful as a philosophy. It's often bundled up with historical and philosophical materialism (which are the good bits) in the context of Marxism, but it's not a falsifiable evidence-based thought system, which in many cases causes a lot of Marxists to get lost in the philosophical weeds trying to understand cryptic writing of Hegel instead of learning more applicable and useful empirical parts and skills of Marxism like economics, history and organizing. You can look up Paul Cockshott's thoughts on the topic.
Dialectics is just systems theory if you think dialectics is not STEMy enough. "Quantitative change leading to qualitative change" is just talking about nonlinear systems where the relations between two variables is not as simple as y = ax, but some complex pdf that doesn't even have an analytic solution. "Dialectical relationship between theory and practice" can easily refer to how those pdfs with nonanalytic solutions require simulations or experimentation (ie practice). "Base vs superstructure" in systems theory terms is just a feedback loop where the output (the superstructure) feeds back into the system.
I would go as far as to say systems theory is just rebranded dialectical materialism because Western scientists didn't want to hand the W to a bunch of commies. A lot of the early adopters of systems theory were people who either existed in close proximity or within the periphery of the Soviet intellectual world but who otherwise did their intellectual work within the West.