ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2026
DentalEdu-AI graph: mapping evidence-grounded and knowledge-structured AI for dental education, assessment, and accuracy.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Post-2022 increase of large language models (LLMs) in dental education has generated a expansive heterogeneous literature spanning MCQ benchmarking, OSCE support, curriculum mapping. Despite significant increase, there is no evidence map showing where knowledge is robust or where methodological investment is needed. The function of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and knowledge graphs (KGs) in minimizing hallucinations is unexplored. The DentalEdu-AI Graph was created from 667 records: PubMed (549), Scopus (20), and web sources (98). After screening, 447 studies were chosen. Multi-label extraction identified AI type, dental specialty, assessment format, study design, and four quality flags was identified. A 37-node/49-edge knowledge graph of the dental AI ecosystem was constructed and validated with TF-IDF RAG-lite retrieval across 10 curriculum queries. Publication output risen considerably from 2 in 2022 to 203 in 2025 (+ 10,050%). ChatGPT/GPT-3.5 tops with 77.6%, followed by Gemini/Bard at 42.1% and Claude at 16.3%. Accuracy accounts for 80.5% of studies, but hallucination is only focused in 7.8%, revealing a major critical gap. RAG appears in 2.9%, and KG in 0.4%, despite being key hallucination-suppression strategies. The RAG-lite demo accomplished 80% top-1 accuracy, 90% top-3 accuracy, and Cohen's κ = 0.640. Dentistry LLM education literature is obsessed with precision and lacks infrastructure. Quality-first system design using RAG pipelines and KG limitations must replace accuracy-focused benchmarks. A KG (37 nodes, 49 edges, 21 typed relations) and TF-IDF demo are publically available in DentalEdu-AI Graph, the first open evidence map and infrastructure blueprint.
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.