ArticleF1000Research2025
Artificial Intelligence Integrated with Intraoral Digital Imaging in Dental Caries Detection, Treatment Planning, and Clinical Decision-Making: A Scoping Review.
Article in F1000Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The emergence of AI technologies has revolutionised dentistry, with intraoral imaging being a key area for innovation. Despite advances and growing interest in applying AI algorithms to intraoral x-rays, the methodological quality, diagnostic validity, and clinical applicability of existing studies remain unclear. Aim: To synthesise and critically appraise the current evidence on AI integrated with intraoral digital radiographic imaging for detecting dental caries in adults, focusing on diagnostic accuracy compared with gold-standard methods and examining methodological quality, clinical applicability, and implementation challenges. Methods: Following the JBI scoping review framework and PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across the PubMed, Scopus, and IEEE Xplore databases from January 2015 to May 2025. Studies that met the predefined eligibility criteria were included. Thematic analysis, combining inductive and deductive approaches following Braun and Clarke's framework, identified five themes. The CASP quality appraisal was performed to ensure methodological rigour. Results: Ten peer-reviewed studies were included in the final data analysis. AI systems detected a greater number of carious lesions than human clinicians, particularly in early-stage caries, with representative metrics including 88% sensitivity, 91% specificity, and 89% accuracy. Other models reported F1-scores up to 89% and AUC ≈95%. Methodological diversity was notable, with histology-validated designs providing the strongest evidence. Implementation challenges included limited external and real-world validation, clinician oversight, ethical/regulatory considerations, and inadequate model interpretability. Conclusion: AI exhibits strong potential to enhance early caries detection on intraoral radiographs and support clinical decision-making in adults. Fully realising AI's clinical potential requires overcoming implementation and methodological challenges. Standardised validation methods across diverse populations and settings are crucial to ensure AI diagnostic reliability and generalisability. Current AI applications in dentistry are primarily designed to assist clinicians in detecting caries; however, their greatest potential lies in a future where they can independently guide treatment planning decisions.
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.