ArticleEuropean journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe2026
Ethical and Regulatory Perception of Artificial Intelligence Among Dental Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical and Regulatory Perception of Artificial Intelligence Among Dental Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- Dentists' awareness of data security and ethical issues during the transition to artificial intelligence-driven clinical practice.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGiven the rapid pace of digital technology and AI integration, addressing humanitarian concerns and potential ethical dilemmas in future dentistry treatment approaches is paramount. This study aimed to provide an overview of ethical problem awareness among dental students. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne hundred and thirty students were recruited. An online survey with 24 multiple choice questions was created on 14 AI domains: familiarity, ethical norms, applications, data management, regulation, database location for training, personal data access, access responsibility, AI's impact on healthcare, moral and legal responsibility, AI and human responsibility, prohibited areas and AI's role in dentistry.
resultsSignificant gender, education and regional differences existed among participants (p < 0.05). Only 25% never heard or used AI. Legal experts and professional boards were perceived as crucial for AI ethics (54.7%), data management (60.6%) and decision making (52.3%). Participants favoured clinicians taking the primary role in decision-making (51.6% very often, 10.9% always). AI impact was perceived as positive on diagnostics (42.1%), therapy (56%) and medical engineering (83.6%). Clinicians were assigned high (50.8%) or very high (14.1%) moral responsibility and high (25.7%) and very high (15%) legal responsibility for medical errors. Most participants recommended minor restrictions, including AI making life-or-death decisions (79.5%). AI was supported for treatment planning (68.5%), active treatment participation (43.8%), treatment evaluation (56.9%) and disease prediction (56.9%).
conclusionsSignificant demographic differences in AI ethics awareness among dental students highlight the need for inclusive AI ethics education and interdisciplinary governance frameworks in dentistry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.