ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Impact of AI-assisted decision support on radiological diagnosis of jawbone lesions.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2026. 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
objectivesArtificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in dentomaxillofacial radiology, with most research focusing on image-based lesion detection and classification. Little is known about how clinicians perform when assisted by knowledge-based diagnostic tools, such as statistical models and generative large language models. This study aimed to evaluate whether AI-assisted decision support can enhance clinicians’ accuracy in diagnosing jawbone lesions. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study compared the diagnostic performance of three general dentists and three dentomaxillofacial radiologists interpreting 25 jawbone lesion cases under three conditions: unaided, assisted by ORAD (a statistical model), and assisted by RAISE (a retrieval-augmented generative AI tool). Diagnostic accuracy was compared using generalized estimating equations, and human-machine agreement was calculated.
resultsDentists’ accuracy improved from 53% unaided to 67% with ORAD but decreased to 49% with RAISE. Dentomaxillofacial radiologists performed consistently high across the three conditions (81% unaided, 88% with ORAD, and 84% with RAISE) and significantly outperformed dentists in all conditions (p ≤ 0.002). Among dentists, using ORAD significantly outperformed RAISE (p = 0.033). Human-machine agreement was moderate for both tools.
conclusionsIn this study, ORAD support modestly improved dentists’ diagnostic accuracy, although not statistically significant, whereas generative AI did not show measurable benefit. Dentomaxillofacial radiologists’ performance was unaffected by either tool. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Generative AI tools relying solely on user input may have limited clinical utility for jawbone lesion diagnosis. Future AI systems should integrate image-based analysis with adaptive, interactive reasoning to better augment clinical decision-making. In its present form, decision-support tools seem more useful for dentists than dentomaxillofacial radiologists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41575579What 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.