Integrating artificial intelligence into dental education

Iveta Ramonaite, Dental Tribune International

Mon. 24. February 2025

save

RIGA, Latvia: As artificial intelligence (AI) is slowly taking root in dentistry and has the potential to improve clinical care, researchers are performing due diligence to inform best practices and ensure proper and honest use of AI in dental practice and education. However, because AI is still in its infancy, formal guidelines in this regard are limited. A recent scoping review sought to address this by examining guidelines from universities and international organisations on the use of generative AI (GenAI) in education in order to identify key areas that could inform the development of guidelines for the use of GenAI in dental schools across the world and recommendations for academic staff.

Prof. Falk Schwendicke. (Image: Falk Schwendicke)

“GenAI tools, such as chatbots, are widely used across industries, also for research and education. However, the landscape of handling these tools in education is patchy at best,” senior author Prof. Falk Schwendicke, director of the Department of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology at LMU Munich in Germany, told Dental Tribune International (DTI). He continued: “Chatbots and other generative tools can support students in theoretical education but also increase the risk of automation bias, that is, students relying on these tools without critically appraising them, which prompted us to evaluate what kinds of recommendations and guidelines exist worldwide.”

In a study published last year, Prof. Schwendicke and his co-researchers examined the attitudes and opinions of dental educators on the use of AI. They found that a major concern they shared was the lack of guidelines on implementing AI. To address this gap, they conducted the present review, which identified and assessed current practices and guidelines directed at academic staff on using GenAI in education, with the aim of uncovering recommendations and key components necessary for developing guidelines on the integration of GenAI into dental education.

The review analysed 31 unique guideline, policy or recommendation documents from 21 universities in 15 countries and the European University Association, the Southern African Regional Universities Association and UNESCO in terms of common applications, benefits, challenges and recommendations for integrating GenAI for academic staff. In general, the documents considered the use of GenAI to enhance teaching, design assignments, personalise learning, promote critical thinking and create content efficiently, among other applications. The documents provided guidance on the safe and ethical use of GenAI and its responsible utilisation to maintain academic integrity, as well as transparency about GenAI usage and fair assessment of student work to maintain accountability. They also offered guidance on data privacy considerations and understanding AI biases in order to better use AI.

Dr Sergio E. Uribe. (Image: Sergio E. Uribe)

“GenAI can change how we teach dentistry. Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini or Mistral AI’s Le Chat have great potential for summarising complex information or generating clinical scenarios for study. However, GenAI has important limitations in healthcare, the biggest of which is that these models generate content that is not based on clinical reasoning but rather on probabilistic models, which means that the content, although convincing, may contain errors,” commented lead author Dr Sergio E. Uribe, a researcher in the Department of Conservative Dentistry and Oral Health at Rīga Stradiņš University.

Similar to Prof. Schwendicke, Dr Uribe believes that the uncritical use of AI tools can lead to an over-reliance on AI, potentially compromising the analytical thinking skills essential in dental professionals. He told DTI: “Dental students should be trained to maintain a healthy scepticism and verify AI outputs against established clinical knowledge and practices. Therefore, the sooner students engage with these tools, the sooner they realise their advantages and limitations, making them critical users of these technologies and better equipped for their professional future.”

The researchers did not find any specific guidelines related to dental education, corroborating the findings of the educator survey. This great gap offers major dental education associations an opportunity to create recommendations for academic staff that encourage safe, equitable and effective GenAI integration into dental education.

According to Prof. Schwendicke, dentistry-specific guidelines for GenAI use are crucial for knowledge dissemination and effective implementation of GenAI in dentistry. He believes that adhering to recognised and reputable guidelines will empower institutions to stay at the forefront of incorporating advanced technologies into their teaching methods. Moreover, he expressed the view that, since dental professionals typically manage sensitive patient information, guidelines are vital to helping safeguard patient privacy.

“GenAI can change how we teach dentistry.”—Dr Sergio E. Uribe, Rīga Stradiņš University

Study co-author Dr Ilze Maldupa, an assistant professor in the Department of Conservative Dentistry and Oral Health at Rīga Stradiņš University, told DTI: “The general AI guidelines we examined do not provide a clear answer to potential questions that could arise in dental education, such as is it allowed for a student to feed an available LLM with a dental radiograph of a patient and ask for a possible diagnosis, or should a professor create clinical scenarios for dental education? Integrating GenAI into dental education requires specific definitions of what is allowed and what not.” She added that some universities have started using LLMs in secure software environments to prevent misuse.

Implementing GenAI in dental curricula

Dr Ilze Maldupa. (Image: Ilze Maldupa)

The findings indicate that it is critical to promote responsible AI use, transparency in AI utilisation and AI literacy to guide educators. In setting out guidance, dental institutions should address these common issues identified in the various guidelines, policies and recommendations analysed, including data privacy protection. Determining and implementing guidelines for dental education will involve establishing clear AI policies, offering AI courses for staff and students, investing in AI infrastructure, forming a multidisciplinary committee to guide AI integration, conducting regular AI policy reviews and fostering open dialogue about AI use.

The researchers urged dental schools to assess, adapt and implement the guidelines and recommendations identified in the review. “Providing literacy around AI, generative or not, will be one of the core aspects when developing future curricula,” stated Prof. Schwendicke.

“Since this area still lacks clear definitions, guidance from any major dental education association is essential to support academics and students. We hope our research serves as a foundation for future discussions and offers practical steps toward the safe and effective adoption of AI in dentistry. We also invite further research on AI’s long-term impact on clinical education, assessment methods and patient care,” Dr Maldupa said.

Dr Uribe believes that certain pedagogical changes are needed to integrate GenAI into dental education. For one, dental schools should rethink assessment strategies and reconsider the role of the traditional classroom. Additionally, they should encourage a more active and participatory learning environment that focuses on understanding, problem-solving and critical appraisal skills to distinguish fact from opinion, potential misinformation or disinformation.

“Despite the current limitations, we are excited to see what GenAI can bring to the future of dental education,” he concluded.

The study, titled “Integrating generative AI in dental education: A scoping review of current practices and recommendations”, was published online on 31 January 2025 in the European Journal of Dental Education, ahead of inclusion in an issue.

Editorial note:

In collaboration with a team of researchers, including Prof. Falk Schwendicke, the International Telecommunication Union and World Health Organization Focus Group on Artificial Intelligence for Health, which develops standards to ensure safe, effective and equitable AI in healthcare, has previously developed a core educational curriculum on artificial intelligence in oral healthcare, which can be accessed here.