Camila Tirapelli, Hugo Gaêta-Araújo, Eliana Dantas da Costa, William C Scarfe, Christiano Oliveira-Santos, Kathleen M Fischer, Brigitte Grosgogeat, Valérie Szonyi, Paulo Melo, Julio Ruiz Marrara, Napat Bolstad, Rubens Spin-Neto, Ruben Pauwels
{"title":"Patient perceptions of artificial intelligence in dental imaging diagnostics: a multicenter survey.","authors":"Camila Tirapelli, Hugo Gaêta-Araújo, Eliana Dantas da Costa, William C Scarfe, Christiano Oliveira-Santos, Kathleen M Fischer, Brigitte Grosgogeat, Valérie Szonyi, Paulo Melo, Julio Ruiz Marrara, Napat Bolstad, Rubens Spin-Neto, Ruben Pauwels","doi":"10.1093/dmfr/twaf018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate patients' perceptions of the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in dental imaging diagnostics across six centers worldwide, hereby named according to their respective cities: Ribeirão Preto (Brazil), Aarhus (Denmark), Lyon (France), Tromsø (Norway), Porto (Portugal), Louisville (USA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was administered at each center, focusing on patient attitudes and beliefs regarding AI in dental imaging diagnostics. The survey comprised 16 statements rated on a Likert scale, patient characteristics, and an optional comment section. Inter-center differences were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher's exact tests, and correlation analyses were performed between participant characteristics and their perceptions of AI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2,581 responses were collected. Most participants expressed positive perceptions of AI as a complementary diagnostic tool, rather than a replacement for human dentists. Key concerns included the need for human oversight, data privacy, and potential cost increases. Differences were observed between centers, with participants from Ribeirão Preto being more likely to accept AI replacing dentists, whereas those from Aarhus and Tromsø expressed greater skepticism about AI's diagnostic capabilities. Higher levels of education and familiarity with AI were positively associated with more favorable views, provided that human supervision remained a key component.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, patients favor the use of AI in dental imaging as an auxiliary diagnostic tool, with human supervision remaining essential. Cultural and demographic factors significantly influence perceptions.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>The findings highlight the need for tailored communication strategies to address patient concerns and facilitate the integration of AI into dental care.</p>","PeriodicalId":11261,"journal":{"name":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twaf018","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate patients' perceptions of the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in dental imaging diagnostics across six centers worldwide, hereby named according to their respective cities: Ribeirão Preto (Brazil), Aarhus (Denmark), Lyon (France), Tromsø (Norway), Porto (Portugal), Louisville (USA).
Methods: A survey was administered at each center, focusing on patient attitudes and beliefs regarding AI in dental imaging diagnostics. The survey comprised 16 statements rated on a Likert scale, patient characteristics, and an optional comment section. Inter-center differences were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher's exact tests, and correlation analyses were performed between participant characteristics and their perceptions of AI.
Results: A total of 2,581 responses were collected. Most participants expressed positive perceptions of AI as a complementary diagnostic tool, rather than a replacement for human dentists. Key concerns included the need for human oversight, data privacy, and potential cost increases. Differences were observed between centers, with participants from Ribeirão Preto being more likely to accept AI replacing dentists, whereas those from Aarhus and Tromsø expressed greater skepticism about AI's diagnostic capabilities. Higher levels of education and familiarity with AI were positively associated with more favorable views, provided that human supervision remained a key component.
Conclusions: Overall, patients favor the use of AI in dental imaging as an auxiliary diagnostic tool, with human supervision remaining essential. Cultural and demographic factors significantly influence perceptions.
Advances in knowledge: The findings highlight the need for tailored communication strategies to address patient concerns and facilitate the integration of AI into dental care.
期刊介绍:
Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (DMFR) is the journal of the International Association of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (IADMFR) and covers the closely related fields of oral radiology and head and neck imaging.
Established in 1972, DMFR is a key resource keeping dentists, radiologists and clinicians and scientists with an interest in Head and Neck imaging abreast of important research and developments in oral and maxillofacial radiology.
The DMFR editorial board features a panel of international experts including Editor-in-Chief Professor Ralf Schulze. Our editorial board provide their expertise and guidance in shaping the content and direction of the journal.
Quick Facts:
- 2015 Impact Factor - 1.919
- Receipt to first decision - average of 3 weeks
- Acceptance to online publication - average of 3 weeks
- Open access option
- ISSN: 0250-832X
- eISSN: 1476-542X