Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41243015›Full record

ReviewEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2026

Artificial Intelligence chatbots in oral pathology: a scoping review of applications, accuracy, and limitations.

Everton Freitas de Morais, Maurília Raquel de Souto Medeiros, Deborah Gondim Lambert Moreira, Lilianny Querino Rocha de Oliveira, Roseana de Almeida Freitas

Abstract readScoping ReviewReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Everton Freitas de MoraisGraduate Program in Oral Biology and Department of Oral Diagnosis, School of Dentistry, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, 13414-018, Brazil. evertonf@unicamp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2173-7672
Maurília Raquel de Souto MedeirosDepartment of Oral Pathology, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, RN, 59056-000, Brazil.
Deborah Gondim Lambert MoreiraDepartment of Oral Pathology, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, RN, 59056-000, Brazil.
Lilianny Querino Rocha de OliveiraGraduate Program in Oral Biology and Department of Oral Diagnosis, School of Dentistry, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, 13414-018, Brazil.
Roseana de Almeida FreitasDepartment of Oral Pathology, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, RN, 59056-000, Brazil.

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2022/00994-5National Council for Scientific and Technological Development 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis scoping review aims to critically assess the applications, performance, and limitations of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots in oral pathology.

methodsAn electronic search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Science Direct from inception to March 2025. Studies were eligible if they evaluated chatbot use in oral pathology, including diagnostic support for oral lesions and cancers, patient education, and professional training.

resultsFrom 761 records identified, 13 studies met the inclusion criteria. AI chatbots demonstrated potential to assist in diagnostics and patient education on oral diseases. Diagnostic accuracy was influenced by lesion type, patient characteristics, and whether multimodal inputs (e.g., images plus text) were provided, with higher accuracy observed when such data were included. Despite these strengths, chatbots frequently exhibited limitations such as inconsistent empathy, citation inaccuracies, and variable readability-issues that were recurrent across studies and highlight the need for professional oversight.

conclusionAI chatbots show promise in supporting diagnostics and patient education in oral pathology. However, key limitations regarding accuracy, empathy, and information reliability necessitate robust validation and ethical safeguards before clinical adoption. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD420251020464.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceMouth DiseasesPathology, OralGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansMouth NeoplasmsArtificial intelligenceChatbotsOral pathologyReview

Identifiers

PMID41243015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.