− HEALTH Nottingham histological grading is central to breast cancer prognosis and treatment planning, but conventiona…− HEALTH Large language models (LLMs) may help organize clinical information, but their use in perioperative settings…+ SPORTS To compare the prognostic performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) model with that of experienced clini…− HEALTH Fracture misdiagnosis is a common diagnostic error in emergency departments (EDs) and minor injury units (MIU…− HEALTH To evaluate the impact of four commercially available AI solutions for chest radiography on diagnostic perfor…− EDUCATION Although endoscopic training has traditionally relied on mentorship and procedural volume to assess proficien…− HEALTH Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare four AI software programs-ChatGPT-5, Microsoft…− SCIENCE Estimating a biological profile, such as sex, is a fundamental step in forensic identification when primary i…
TruaceTracing the truth around AISunday, August 23, 2026
Subscribe
Sports·G Space·Evidence-backed gain·Published 2026-08-23

Can Artificial Intelligence Match Human Expertise in Long-Term Periodontal Prognosis? A Comparative Accuracy Study

Abstract: To compare the prognostic performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) model with that of experienced clinicians in predicting tooth loss over a 10-year period. An AI model trained on structured clinical and radiographic data was compared with 12 periodontists and 11 general dentists (GDs), who independently assigned prognostic scores (0-10 scale) to 300 teeth with known 10-year outcomes. AI and clinician performance were evaluated under a fixed threshold and group-specific optimal thresholds. Accuracy, sensit…

TRV-2026-0856Peer-reviewedPermanent record — cite & verify
Can Artificial Intelligence Match Human Expertise in Long-Term Periodontal Prognosis? A Comparative Accuracy Study

Assessing neurophysiologic markers for training and simulation to develop expertise in complex cognitive tasks by Sullivan, Joseph A.. Public domain

The quick read

To compare the prognostic performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) model with that of experienced clinicians in predicting tooth loss over a 10-year period. An AI model trained on structured clinical and radiographic data was compared with 12 periodontists and 11 general dentists (GDs), who independently assigned prognostic scores (0-10 scale) to 300 teeth with known 10-year outcomes.

AI and clinician performance were evaluated under a fixed threshold and group-specific optimal thresholds. Using the fixed threshold (score > 5 = survival), clinicians achieved higher overall accuracy than AI (75.6% periodontists, 74.9% GDs, 69.2% AI; p < 0.05), with sensitivity low and comparable across groups (14.7%-22.7%).

Main points
  • To compare the prognostic performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) model with that of experienced clinicians in predicting tooth loss over a 10-year period.
  • An AI model trained on structured clinical and radiographic data was compared with 12 periodontists and 11 general dentists (GDs), who independently assigned prognostic scores (0-10 scale) to 300 teeth with known 10-year outcomes.
  • AI and clinician performance were evaluated under a fixed threshold and group-specific optimal thresholds.
Gain

Using the fixed threshold (score > 5 = survival), clinicians achieved higher overall accuracy than AI (75.6% periodontists, 74.9% GDs, 69.2% AI; p < 0.05), with sensitivity low and comparable across groups (14.7%-22.7%).

The rundown

AI and clinician performance were evaluated under a fixed threshold and group-specific optimal thresholds. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and calibration were used for comparison.

Sources

Reader signal

How should this claim be treated?

The debate