ArticleJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research
A questionnaire study regarding knowledge, attitude and usage of artificial intelligence and machine learning by the orthodontic fraternity of Northern India.
Article in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The potentials and challenges of integrating generative artificial intelligence (AI) in dental and orthodontic education: a systematic review.BMC oral health · 2025Pooled it
- Orthodontists' Perceptions, Attitudes, and Adoption of Artificial Intelligence: A Scoping Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Assessment of dentists' knowledge, attitude and practice regarding artificial intelligence in periodontics.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Development of an AI model to predict tooth movement during orthodontic treatment.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Translating AI to the Bedside with Physician Buy-In: Recommendations from a Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of the Literature.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Integrating Artificial Intelligence into Orthodontic Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Teaching Application.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the questionnaire study was to determine the knowledge, attitude, and perception of orthodontists regarding the role of artificial intelligence in dentistry in general and orthodontics specifically, and to determine the use of artificial intelligence by the orthodontist. Methods: This cross-sectional study was done among the orthodontists of Northern India (clinicians, academicians, and postgraduates) through a web-based electronic survey using Google Forms. The study was designed to obtain information about AI and its basic usage in daily life, in dentistry, and in orthodontics from the participants. The options given were set specifically according to the Likert scale to maintain the correct format. The questionnaire was validated by one AI expert and one orthodontic expert, followed by pretesting in a smaller group of 25 orthodontists 2 weeks before circulation. A total of 100 orthodontists and postgraduate students responded to the pretested online questionnaire link for 31 questions in four sections sent via social media websites in a period of 3 months. Results: The majority of the participants believe that AI could be useful in diagnosis and treatment planning and could revolutionize dentistry in general. 84 % of the orthodontic academicians and clinicians, including PG students, consider AI a useful tool for boosting performance and delivering quality care in orthodontics, and 72 % see AI as a partner rather than a competitor in the foreseeable future of dentistry. 90 % of the participants believe that the incorporation of AI into CBCT analysis can be a valuable addition to diagnosis and treatment planning. 86 % of total participants agree that AI can be helpful in decision-making for orthognathic surgery, and 84 % find AI useful for bone age assessment. Conclusions: It was observed that academicians are more aware of AI terminologies and usage as compared to PG students and clinicians. There is a consensus that AI is a useful tool for diagnosis and treatment planning, boosting performance and quality care in orthodontics. In spite of these facts, 62.5 % of clinicians and 40 % of PG students are still not using AI for cephalometric analysis (p = 0.033).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.