Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41181550›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Developing a consent checklist for AI in dentistry: Thematic analysis and pilot survey validation.

Jelena Roganović

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Navigating the ethical and legal landscape of artificial intelligence in dentistry.Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry · 2026
    Article
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

1 author.

Jelena RoganovićFaculty of Dental Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2950-4056

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Artificial intelligencedentistryethicsliabilitypatient consenttransparency

Identifiers

PMID41181550
PMCPMC12576000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.