Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42659419›Full record

ReviewBrazilian oral research2026

Artificial intelligence for the detection and diagnosis of oral and maxillofacial lesions: evidence, limitations, and future directions.

Maria Augusta Visconti, Michael Marc Bornstein, Alan Roger Santos-Silva, Manoela Domingues Martins, Matheus Lima Oliveira

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brazilian oral research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Maria Augusta ViscontiUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro - UFRJ, School of Dentistry, Department of Pathology and Oral Diagnosis, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8837-8387
Michael Marc BornsteinUniversity of Basel, University Center for Dental Medicine Basel UZB, Department of Oral Health & Medicine, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7773-8957
Alan Roger Santos-SilvaUniversidade Estadual de Campinas - Unicamp, Piracicaba Dental School, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2040-6617
Manoela Domingues MartinsUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul - UFRGS, School of Dentistry, Department of Oral Pathology, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8662-5965
Matheus Lima OliveiraUniversidade Estadual de Campinas - Unicamp, Piracicaba Dental School, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8054-8759

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising tool to support or perform specific oral diagnostic tasks, particularly through advances in machine learning and deep learning. This comprehensive review aimed to synthesize current evidence and explore future directions for AI-driven or AI-supported oral diagnostic workflows across four target pathologies: odontogenic cysts, odontogenic tumors, oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs), and oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). A structured search strategy combining MeSH terms and free-text keywords was applied, encompassing target conditions, AI methodologies, diagnostic performance metrics, and clinician comparator groups. Across all pathologies, AI models demonstrated encouraging performance, frequently approaching that of experienced clinicians, particularly in image-based detection and classification tasks. In some contexts, improved sensitivity was observed, suggesting potential value in early disease detection. However, findings were highly variable and often limited by methodological constraints, including retrospective study designs, small or curated datasets, lack of external validation, and heterogeneity in reporting metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve. Importantly, no consistent evidence supports the superiority of AI over clinicians across all performance measures. Instead, current data suggest that AI may serve as a valuable adjunct to clinical decision-making, with potential to reduce diagnostic variability and support non-specialist practitioners. Future research should prioritize prospective, multicenter studies with standardized methodologies, robust external validation, and evaluation of real-world and patient-centered outcomes. While AI holds significant promise, its routine clinical implementation for oral diagnostic tasks remains premature, requiring further validation, transparency, and integration into clinical workflows.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDiagnosis, OralMouth NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Squamous CellHumansOdontogenic CystsOdontogenic TumorsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID42659419
PMCPMC13508679

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.