ArticleBMC medical education2025
From lecture hall to clinic: dental students' AI readiness and anxiety across educational stages.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prompt Framing and Evidence Requirement for AI-Generated Educational Responses in Dental Education: Experimental Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Inclusive Leadership, Psychological Safety, AI Readiness, and Nurses' AI Literacy: A Longitudinal Study.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- Depression and Artificial Intelligence Anxiety Among Chinese University Students: A Bayesian Network Analysis.Depression and anxiety · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly shaping modern healthcare, its integration into dental education remains underexplored-particularly with regard to how students' readiness and anxiety toward AI evolve throughout their academic progression. Existing studies primarily focus on medical cohorts, leaving a critical knowledge gap in understanding how dental students across different years perceive and adapt to these technological transformations. This study aims to address this gap by assessing both cognitive readiness and emotional responses to AI among current and future dental professionals.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted with 420 participants, including first- to fifth-year dental students and recent graduates, using purposive sampling. Two validated instruments were employed: the Medical Artificial Intelligence Readiness Scale and the Artificial Intelligence Anxiety Scale. Descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA were used to analyze differences across academic year, gender, age, AI familiarity, and prior training experience.
resultsSignificant differences in AI readiness were observed based on academic year, with second-year students demonstrating the highest readiness across subdomains (Cognition, Ability, Vision), while fifth-year students scored the lowest. Participants with prior AI-related knowledge or training consistently showed higher readiness and lower anxiety levels, although the reduction in anxiety was not always statistically significant. Gender-based analysis revealed that female participants reported higher AI anxiety in specific subdomains, including Learning and Surveillance, while overall readiness scores did not significantly differ by gender or age.
conclusionFindings emphasize the need for early, continuous, and practice-oriented AI education in dental curricula. Structured exposure to AI-related concepts not only enhances competence but may also reduce anxiety. Tailoring pedagogical approaches to different stages of training could foster a more balanced integration of AI in dentistry-addressing both technological proficiency and emotional resilience.
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.