General Dental Council publishes assessment on use of AI in dentistry

Diagnostic risks were also noted in the studies included. Studies found that some AI platforms produced false negative results, particularly for subtle findings such as voids or early caries. This finding reinforces the importance of viewing AI as a support tool rather than as a replacement for clinical judgment. 

Patient responses to the use of AI in their care were mixed. The report explained that, while some patients welcomed robotics-assisted surgery, others experienced increased anxiety in the presence of complex machinery. Also, compliance with AI-driven monitoring tools tended to decline over time, and the studies suggested that this was because repetitive automated messages or the frequency of scans may cause patients to disengage. In addition, user error when capturing intra-oral photographs affected the reliability of monitoring. 

The report found little evidence on issues concerning equality, diversity and inclusion or ethical and data protection, despite the generation of large volumes of additional patient data by AI-based systems. The authors noted that research aimed specifically at the use of AI in dentistry in the UK could “ensure that aspects such as equality, diversity and inclusion, and data protection, were properly considered in regard to the UK’s cultural and social context”. 

Overall, the report concluded that, while AI has clear potential to enhance dental services, its use in daily dental practice remains limited. It called for future UK-specific research to address clinical, regulatory and ethical considerations, focusing particularly on patient safety and diverse patient needs. 

The report, titled Artificial Intelligence and Dental Service Provision: A Rapid Evidence Assessment, can be accessed here.