ReviewCureus2025
Role of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics: A Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Evaluation of Apical Closure in Panoramic Radiographs Using Vision Transformer Architectures ViT-Based Apical Closure Classification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have emerged as transformative tools in conservative dentistry and endodontics, revolutionizing diagnostic accuracy, treatment planning, and procedural efficiency. This narrative review explores the applications, methodologies, advantages, and challenges of AI in these fields. AI-driven systems, such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs), excel in analyzing dental imaging, including radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography, to detect caries, periapical lesions, and root canal morphologies with high precision. These technologies streamline tasks such as tooth shade determination and working length measurement, reducing human error and enhancing clinical outcomes. Predictive models utilize patient data to assess the risks of caries progression and endodontic complications, thereby enabling the development of personalized treatment plans. Natural language processing aids in extracting insights from clinical records, while generative adversarial networks enhance dataset quality by creating synthetic images. Despite these advancements, challenges persist, including limited availability of diverse, annotated datasets, which affects model generalizability across populations. The opaque nature of some AI algorithms raises concerns about interpretability, potentially undermining clinician trust. High computational requirements and implementation costs limit accessibility, particularly in resource-constrained settings. Ethical issues, such as patient data privacy and the risk of over-reliance on AI, further complicate adoption. Addressing these barriers requires standardized dental imaging databases, transparent algorithms, and collaboration between dental professionals and data scientists. Future research should focus on improving model explainability, expanding dataset diversity, and integrating AI seamlessly into clinical workflows. By overcoming these challenges, AI and ML hold the potential to become indispensable in conservative dentistry and endodontics, offering precise, efficient, and patient-centered solutions that enhance diagnostic reliability and treatment success, ultimately advancing the quality of dental care. This narrative review aimed to explore the theoretical foundations, historical evolution, and practical applications of AI and ML in conservative dentistry and endodontics, with a focus on their types, methodologies, advantages, and limitations.
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.