Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40700462›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2025

Machine learning in dentistry: a scoping review.

Shrey Lakhotia, Hormazd Godrej, Amandeep Kaur, Chaitanya Sai Nutakki, Michelle Mun, Pascal Eber, Leo Anthony Celi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Shrey LakhotiaHelios Enter Data Warehouse IT Exp., Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4749-1463
Hormazd GodrejIndependent Researcher, Mumbai, India.
Amandeep KaurDepartment of Oral Health Sciences, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Chaitanya Sai NutakkiDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, SRM University, Mangalagiri, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-5007-6657
Michelle MunFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, Melbourne Dental School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0901-4110
Pascal EberDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-7799-0057
Leo Anthony CeliLaboratory for Computational Physiology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6712-6626

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI), specifically machine learning (ML), is increasingly applied in decision-making for dental diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. However, the methodological completeness of published models has not been rigorously assessed. We performed a scoping review of PubMed-indexed articles (English, 1 January 2018â€'31 December 2023) that used ML in any dental specialty. Each study was evaluated with the TRIPOD + AI rubric for key reporting elements such as data preprocessing, model validation, and clinical performance. Out of 1,506 identified studies, 280 met the inclusion criteria. Oral and maxillofacial radiology (27.5%), oral and maxillofacial surgery (15.0%), and general dentistry (14.3%) were the most represented specialties. Sixty-four studies (22.9%) lacked comparison with a clinical reference standard or existing model performing the same task. Most models focused on classification (59.6%), whereas generative applications were relatively rare (1.4%). Key gaps included limited assessment of model bias, poor outlier reporting, scarce calibration evaluation, low reproducibility, and restricted data access. ML could transform dental care, but robust calibration assessment and equity evaluation are critical for real-world adoption. Future research should prioritize error explainability, outlier reporting, reproducibility, fairness, and prospective validation.

Identifiers

PMID40700462
PMCPMC12286321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.