aceCan Artificial Intelligence Match Human Expertise in Long-Term Periodontal Prognosis? A Comparative Accuracy Study
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…
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%).
Evidence
- Peer-reviewedJournal of Clinical Periodontology2026-08-21
How should this claim be treated?
Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-0856, v1: “Can Artificial Intelligence Match Human Expertise in Long-Term Periodontal Prognosis? A Comparative Accuracy Study.” Truvace, 2026-08-23. /record/TRV-2026-0856 (accessed at citation time). sha256 a1ca5c6cf595831a…
Calibration history
Every change to this record since certification, in the open. None yet — the reading has held since it entered the record.
Certified into the record
How to verify without trusting this page
Fetch the canonical text of any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-0856 and hash it yourself — for example shasum -a 256 on the saved canonical field. The result must equal content_hash, and each version’s text ends with prev:followed by the prior version’s hash (version 1 chains to 64 zeros). If a single character of any version had been altered since certification, the chain would not reproduce.