ArticleDigital health
Developing a consent checklist for AI in dentistry: Thematic analysis and pilot survey validation.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Implant Dentistry: Clinical Validity, Diagnostic Performance, Surgical Planning, and Medico-Legal Implications-A Narrative Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Informed Consent in AI-Augmented Dentistry and Dental Research: A Scoping Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Navigating the ethical and legal landscape of artificial intelligence in dentistry.Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into dentistry has potential to improve diagnostic accuracy and enable more personalized treatment planning. However, the practical and legal aspects of obtaining informed consent in this context remain unresolved. Objectives: The present article aimed to unify current positions found in the ethics literature with current legal standards in order to develop clinically applicable decision flowchart and checklist for patient consent in AI-assisted dentistry. Methods: A qualitative thematic synthesis of 50 publications addressing AI, ethics, and informed consent in dentistry was conducted using Braun and Clarke's six-phase framework. Insights were translated into a structured consent checklist and a decision-making flowchart, which were then evaluated through a pilot survey of practicing dentists in Serbia who use AI tools. Results: Twelve dentists completed the survey. Most rated the checklist and flowchart as clear, practical, and feasible for clinical application. Over 90% agreed that standardized consent improves patient communication and trust when AI is explained as being under clinician supervision. Conclusions: The proposed consent checklist and flowchart provide a clinically applicable framework that strengthens patient autonomy, supports ethical and transparent AI use in dentistry, and offers guidance for practitioners navigating emerging regulatory requirements.
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.