ArticleBMC oral health2026
An explainable and transparent machine learning approach for predicting dental caries: a cross-national validation study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Explainability, Bias and Generalizability of AI Models in Dentistry: A Systematic Review of Model Interpretability and Equity.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Pooled it
- From Algorithmic Performance to Clinical Translation: Translational Readiness of Imaging-Based Artificial Intelligence in Dentistry-A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence for dental caries diagnosis: translating algorithms to clinical practice.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere has been a notable increase in artificial intelligence (AI) studies in dentistry. However, the inadequate use of proper validation methods has led to overly optimistic performance metrics of machine learning (ML) models. External validation provides evidence of a ML model's performance with independent datasets and is crucial for generalizability.
methodsWe developed Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) models to detect dental caries using easy-to-collect questionnaire data. ML model training was conducted using cross-validation nested resampling with a holdout test set, utilizing NHANES datasets (n = 6070). Performance of the trained model was tested using external data from the Northern Finland Birth Cohorts (NFBC1966 and NFBC1986; n = 3616). To enhance interpretability, beeswarm plots were constructed to visualize variable importance.
resultsThe ML model demonstrated acceptable performance in predicting dental caries on the internal dataset, with an area under the operating characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.785 (95% CI 0.756-0.813). However, the model encountered difficulties in identifying participants with dental caries, as shown by its poor sensitivity of 0.391, despite achieving a high specificity of 0.919. When applied to the external dataset, the ML model encountered significant challenges, with the AUC dropping to 0.550 (95% CI 0.532-0.569), sensitivity decreasing to 0.053, and specificity slightly improving to 0.974. Important variables identified by the model were self-rated condition of teeth and gums, presence of missing teeth, financial status, and time since last dental visit.
conclusionThe performance of our ML model during external validation degraded notably compared to the internal validation. However, the XAI methodology exhibited great potential to be used in the future for individualized dental caries risk assessment.
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.