ArticleFrontiers in oral health2025
Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of oral and maxillofacial surgeons towards the use of artificial intelligence in clinical practice and training: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Frontiers in oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: This study aimed to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) clinicians and trainees relating to the use of artificial intelligence (AI) within OMS practice and training. Methods: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted with OMS specialists and trainees in Singapore regarding their views on AI in OMS. The survey comprised 25 questions over five sections, and was distributed via an online survey platform. Results: 48 participants completed the survey, including 37 specialists and 11 trainees. 60.4% did not report a good understanding of AI, 52.1% were not aware of the uses of AI in OMS, and 81.3% had not had any form of AI-related training. Most felt that AI could be beneficial for diagnosis and treatment planning (72.9%) and enhancing patient outcomes (75.0%), and should be incorporated into OMS training (68.8%). While there were no differences between genders, younger participants tended towards more positive attitudes ( Conclusion: OMS specialists and trainees in Singapore generally have optimistic views toward AI, with younger respondents tending towards more positive attitudes. The levels of knowledge and practice leave room for improvement.
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.