Patient perceptions of artificial intelligence in dental imaging diagnostics: a multicenter survey.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
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.

患者对牙科成像诊断中人工智能的看法:一项多中心调查。
目的:评估患者对全球六个中心在牙科成像诊断中使用人工智能(AI)的看法,根据各自的城市命名:里贝赫普雷托(巴西)、奥胡斯(丹麦)、里昂(法国)、特罗姆瑟(挪威)、波尔图(葡萄牙)、路易斯维尔(美国)。方法:在每个中心进行一项调查,重点关注患者对人工智能在牙科成像诊断中的态度和信念。该调查包括16项陈述,根据李克特量表、患者特征和可选的评论部分进行评分。使用卡方检验和Fisher精确检验分析中心间差异,并对参与者特征与他们对人工智能的感知进行相关性分析。结果:共收集问卷2581份。大多数参与者都积极地认为人工智能是一种辅助诊断工具,而不是人类牙医的替代品。主要的担忧包括人工监督、数据隐私和潜在的成本增加。各中心之间存在差异,来自里贝赫奥普雷托的参与者更有可能接受人工智能取代牙医,而来自奥胡斯和特罗姆瑟的参与者则对人工智能的诊断能力持更大的怀疑态度。较高的教育水平和对人工智能的熟悉程度与更有利的观点呈正相关,前提是人类监督仍然是一个关键组成部分。结论:总体而言,患者倾向于在牙科成像中使用人工智能作为辅助诊断工具,人工监督仍然是必不可少的。文化和人口因素显著影响人们的看法。知识的进步:研究结果强调需要量身定制的沟通策略,以解决患者的担忧,并促进人工智能与牙科保健的整合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
65
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
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
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信